Higher-Order Turbulence Closure and Its Impact on Climate Simulations in the Community Atmosphere Model

235 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Advanced Two-Moment Bulk Microphysics for Global Models. Part II: Global Model Solutions and Aerosol–Cloud Interactions* (2015, methodology): “Ghan 2000;Ghan et al. 2011) and ice nuclei (Kärcher et al. 2006; Liu et al. 2007). Despite these advances, the sensitivity or ‘‘susceptibility’’ (Platnick and Twomey 1994) of clouds and precipitation to aerosols in GCMs is very different from a sensitivity deduced from observations (Quaas et al. 200”
Understanding Cloud and Convective Characteristics in Version 1 of the E3SM Atmosphere Model (2018, methodology): “This is different from Bogenschutz et al. (2013), which showed that the high cloud fraction in CAM5 with CLUBB is similar to the default CAM5.”
The Whole Atmosphere Community Climate Model Version 6 (WACCM6) (2019, unknown): “(2002), CLUBB: Bogenschutz et al. (2013), Larson et al. (2002), CMIP5 RCPs: Meinshausen et al. (2011), CMIP6: SSPs Meinshausen et al.”
An Evaluation of the Large‐Scale Atmospheric Circulation and Its Variability in CESM2 and Other CMIP Models (2020, background): “A major change is that the boundary layer, shallow convection, and cloud macrophysics are combined within the new Cloud Layers Unified By Binormals (CLUBB) scheme (Golaz et al., 2002), resulting in a more consistent representation of boundary layer turbulence (Bogenschutz et al., 2013).”