Assessment of Solution Uncertainties in Single-Column Modeling Frameworks

Single-column models (SCMs) have been extensively promoted in recent years as an effective means to develop and test physical parameterizations targeted for more complex three-dimensional climate models. Although there are some clear advantages associated with single-column modeling, there are also some significant disadvantages, including the absence of large-scale feedbacks. Basic limitations of an SCM framework can make it difficult to interpret solutions, and at times contribute to rather striking failures to identify even first-order sensitivities as they would be observed in a global climate simulation. This manuscript will focus on one of the basic experimental approaches currently exploited by the single-column modeling community, with an emphasis on establishing the inherent uncertainties in the numerical solutions. The analysis will employ the standard physics package from the NCAR CCM3 and will illustrate the nature of solution uncertainties that arise from nonlinearities in parameterized physics. The results of this study suggest the need to make use of an ensemble methodology when conducting single-column modeling investigations.

[1]  Andrew F. Loughe,et al.  The Relationship between Ensemble Spread and Ensemble Mean Skill , 1998 .

[2]  Minghua Zhang,et al.  Constrained Variational Analysis of Sounding Data Based on Column-Integrated Budgets of Mass, Heat, Moisture, and Momentum: Approach and Application to ARM Measurements. , 1997 .

[3]  David L. Williamson,et al.  The Accumulation of Rounding Errors and Port Validation for Global Atmospheric Models , 1997, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[4]  David A. Randall,et al.  Single-Column Models and Cloud Ensemble Models as Links between Observations and Climate Models , 1996 .

[5]  C. Bretherton,et al.  The Atlantic Stratocumulus Transition Experiment - ASTEX , 1995 .

[6]  S. Schwartz,et al.  The Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Program: Programmatic Background and Design of the Cloud and Radiation Test Bed , 1994 .

[7]  M. Ehrendorfer.  The Liouville Equation and Its Potential Usefulness for the Prediction of Forecast Skill. Part I: Theory , 1994 .

[8]  J. Hack.  Parameterization of moist convection in the National Center for Atmospheric Research community climate model (CCM2) , 1994 .

[9]  P. Webster,et al.  TOGA COARE: The Coupled Ocean-Atmosphere Response Experiment. , 1992 .

[10]  Joseph Tribbia,et al.  The Reliability of Improvements in Deterministic Short-Range Forecasts in the Presence of Initial State and Modeling Deficiencies , 1988 .

[11]  Katsuyuki V. Ooyama,et al.  Scale-Controlled Objective Analysis , 1987 .

[12]  A. Betts,et al.  A new convective adjustment scheme. Part II: Single column tests using GATE wave, BOMEX, ATEX and arctic air‐mass data sets , 1986 .

[13]  Veerabhadran Ramanathan,et al.  Climate modeling through radiative‐convective models , 1978 .

[14]  S. Esbensen,et al.  Determination of Bulk Properties of Tropical Cloud Clusters from Large-Scale Heat and Moisture Budgets , 1973 .

[15]  Philip J. Rasch,et al.  Water vapor transport in the NCAR CCM2 , 1994 .

[16]  D. Williamson.  The Effect of Vertical Finite Difference Approximations on Simulations with the NCAR Community Climate Model , 1988 .

[17]  R. E. Livezey,et al.  Statistical Field Significance and its Determination by Monte Carlo Techniques , 1983 .