cmip6_discussion []

This page is read only. You can view the source, but not change it. Ask your administrator if you think this is wrong.
===== Introduction =====

An explanation of all the MIPs that have been validated for CMIP6 can be found in {{:cmip6-endorsedmips_summary_150819_sent.pdf|pdf}}.

The experiments that will be done by CFUers are described in the following section. There are five sets of CMIP6 experiments. All the CFUers are encouraged to indicate what role they will play in the selected MIPs, especially in the context of the projects they are involved in.

===== MIPs with participation of the Climate Prediction Group =====

==== DECK ====
The DECK which will serve as an entry card for CMIP will consist of the following four simulations:
  -  AMIP simulation (~1979-2014) not run by us but other members of the EC-Earth consortium
  -  Pre-industrial control simulation not run by us but other members of the EC-Earth consortium
  -  1%/yr CO2 increase not run by us but other members of the EC-Earth consortium
  -  Abrupt 4xCO2 run not run by us but other members of the EC-Earth consortium
In addition, the CMIP6 Historical Simulation has been added which will serve as the entry card for CMIP6 and as a benchmark for CMIP6-Endorsed MIPs. The historical simulation (1850-2014) will use the specific forcings consistent with CMIP6 which will be finalized on the timescales laid out in slide 10. The CMIP6 Historical Simulation has been introduced in addition to the DECK to better separate CMIP from a specific Phase of CMIP (see slide 4 for illustration and slide 5 for the main criteria for DECK and Historical Phase X). Both DECK and the CMIP6 Historical Simulation should be run for each model configuration used in the subsequent CMIP6-Endorsed MIPs. Future climate change scenarios will be run as part of ScenarioMIP with a Tier 1 that includes three different scenarios, spanning different possible futures.

The climate prediction group will run 5 members of historical simulation for comparison with the decadal predictions that will be run within DCPP (see below).

Further details can be found in the following presentation: http://www.wcrp-climate.org/images/modelling/WGCM/CMIP/CMIP6FinalDesign_WGCMMeeting_150116_Sent.pdf
==== DCPP ====

Details of the DCPP experiments can be found in this document {{:dcpp_components_30mar15.pdf|pdf}}. DCPP is divided into 3 components:

  * Component A: hindcasts
  * Component B: forecasts
  * Component C: predictability, mechanisms and case studies

The climate prediction group will run 5 members of hindcasts and 5 members of forecasts. The other 5 members should be run
by another member of the EC-Earth consortum (KNMI as for CMIP5?).

Under DCPP, Martin Ménégoz will perform parts of C3, the experiments that focus on the volcanic effect on decadal prediction. These experiments are very close to experiments performed in the context of SPECS and are coordinated with VolMIP. They consist in repeating the decadal hindcasts without the volcanic forcing of large eruptions.

Local contact: F.J. Doblas-Reyes

==== VolMIP ====

The aim and the design of the experiments planned for VolMIP can be found in [[http://volmip.org/|http://volmip.org/]] and are detailed in this file {{:volmip_cmip6-endorsedmip_application_final.doc|.doc}} It consists in three sets of experiments (Tier 1-2-3). The Climate Prediction Group will not be able to perform all the experiments planned and a selection has been done. From the Tier 1, Martin Ménégoz will perform the experiments "volc-pinatubo-full" and "volc-pinatubo-ini", which consist in 25-member simulations, one with preindustrial conditions, and the other as a forecast simulating a Pinatubo eruption in 2015. Depending on the future projects in the group, it could be interesting to perform more experiments, in particular to try to complete the Tier1 of VolMIP, that consists in a high number of simulations, especially when considering that some experiments from Tier2 have been moved to Tier1 in June 2015.

NB1: to initialize volc-pinatubo-full, we will need to run a pre-industrial control run (picontrol, DECK). We will probably run it at BSC

NB2: volc-pinatubo-ini is common with DCPP

Local contact: M. Ménégoz
==== HiResMIP ====
HighResMIP will coordinate the efforts in the high-resolution modelling community. Joint analysis, based on process-based assessment and seeking to attribute model performance to emerging physical climate processes (without the complications of Earth System feedbacks) and sensitivity of model physics to model resolution, will further highlight the impact of enhanced resolution on the simulated climate.

The protocol and various other document are available from the [[https://dev.knmi.nl/projects/highresmip
|HiResMIP wiki]].

Some initial ideas on how to generate an SST and sea-ice forcing set for the AMIP-style runs (including the future part to 2050 and beyond) has been posted to the [[https://dev.knmi.nl/documents/21|wiki]].

The climate prediction group will run a 1950-2050 coupled simulation.

Local contact: V. Guemas

==== ScenarioMIP ====

The priority of ScenarioMIP is to address two (out of the three) CMIP6 science questions: 'How does the Earth System respond to forcing?', and 'How can we assess future climate changes given climate variability, predictability and uncertainties in scenarios?'; but not 'What are the origins and consequences of systematic model biases?'.

The ScenarioMIP experiments aim at contributing to the WCRP grand challenges by addressing the following question: How will plausible future forcing pathways affect climate extremes, global and regional climate information, regional sea level rise, water availability, and biospheric feedbacks, and how will these effects influence mitigation and adaptation possibilities?.

Two types of 21st-century (21C) scenarios have been included in the ScenarioMIP design:
  * 'SSP-based RCPs' / new versions of the RCPs that are based on the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs; 1-to-5), which provide descriptions of future societal conditions that serve as the basis both for deriving forcing pathways and for characterizing vulnerability and mitigative capacity  
  * 'Gap scenarios' / new forcing pathways not covered by the RCPs, including new unmitigated SSP baselines or new mitigation pathways; i.e. SSP3-7.0, SSP4-3.7 

The experimental design consists of six 21C scenarios grouped into two tiers by priority (see below), with only one member per scenario requested from each model. In addition, within Tier 2, other experiments are proposed: (i) an overshoot scenario in which a peak in radiative forcing occurs in the 21C, (ii) additional ensemble members for one of the 21C scenarios, (iii) three long-term extensions to 2300.
  * Tier 1 (priority experiments); by forcing category in 2100: SSP1-2.6 (Low), SSP2-4.5 (Medium), SSP3-7.0 (Medium-High), SSP5-8.5 (High)
  * Tier 2 (additional experiments): SSP4-3.7 (Low), SSP1-6.0 (Medium)        

The climate prediction group will contribute with 5 members of SSP2-4.5 for a comparison with the decadal predictions that will be run under DCPP.

The final ScenarioMIP proposal for CMIP6 endorsement can be found in the following document:
http://www.wcrp-climate.org/images/modelling/WGCM/CMIP/ApplicationSummary_CMIP6-EndorsedMIPs_150408_Sent.pdf

The overview and updates of ScenarioMIP can be found in its website: 
https://www2.cgd.ucar.edu/research/mips/scenario-mip
 

Documented by J. García-Serrano


==== SIMIP ===== 

The Sea Ice MIP (SIMIP,  {{http://www.geosci-model-dev.net/9/3427/2016/gmd-9-3427-2016.pdf|Paper}}) has the peculiarity to be a "diagnostic" MIP meaning that no actual dedicated experiments will be run under this project. In that sense, SIMIP will be "passive" and analyze information from simulations that will be produced in other MIPs, including DECK simulations.

SIMIP has the ultimate goal to improve understanding about sea ice as a component of the complex coupled climate system: how does it respond to external forcing? how does it feed back? what is the role of internal versus forced variability of sea ice parameters?

The SIMIP is organized around three guiding set of questions:

(1) How can we explain model spread in simulating sea ice characteristics? Are they due to differences in the inherent formulation of physics and resolution? What is the role of sea ice physics with respect to differences in atmospheric and oceanic forcings? How does model spread compare to other sources of uncertainty (scenario, irreducible)?

(2) How can we explain model biases? What part of the mismatch is truly related to model deficiencies, and what part is due to other factors (observational uncertainty, internal variability, methodological failures in the comparison,...)? What new diagnostics can be developed to trace the ability of models to represent processes (e.g., the ice-albedo feedback) and not just numbers (e.g., sea ice extent) that may hide compensating errors?

(3) To what extent can we predict sea ice? What is the potential predictability of sea ice? What is the quality of initial conditions currently available? How to generate ensembles that reflect our uncertainty at best?

BSC-ES is contributing to SIMIP through F. Massonnet being a member of the SIMIP-panel (lead by D. Notz and A. Jahn) but also by the provision of initial sea ice states generated by the ensemble Kalman filter with EC-Earth.


Documented by F. Massonnet.
User Tools

Site Tools

Page Tools
