Intercomparison of the cloud water phase among global climate models
By Muge Komurcu, T. Storelvmo, I. Tan, Ulrike Lohmann, Y. Yun, J. Penner, Yong Wang, Xiaohong Liu, Toshihiko Takemura. 2014
173 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Atmospheric Science, Global and Planetary Change
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d18f28a67eb552ecc0785defcb7478afc21c21e3
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Atmospheric Science
In Global and Planetary Change
Citations in the corpus
- Opinion: Cloud-phase climate feedback and the importance of ice-nucleating particles (2020, background): “…particles (INPs), are present and are active at the local cloud temperature, then the supercooled liquid water content and albedo of these clouds can be dramatically reduced through ice-related microphysical processes (Vergara-Temprado et al., 2018; Komurcu et al., 2014; Storelvmo, 2017).”
- Mixed‐phase cloud physics and Southern Ocean cloud feedback in climate models (2015, background): “Model sensitivity studies show that condensate phase is likely to affect condensate mass through differences in the precipitation efficiencies and radiative properties of ice and liquid [Klein et al., 2009; Komurcu et al., 2014] [Ceppi P, Hartmann DL, and Webb MJ Mechanisms of the negative shortwave”