Skill and uncertainty in climate models
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12929197 |
|---|---|
| Authors | J C Hargreaves (0000-0002-4217-5023, Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2010 |
| Volume | 1 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 556-564 |
| Publication date | 2010-06-24 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Climate Change (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1757-7780 • E-ISSN: 1757-7799 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1002/wcc.58 |
| OpenAlex | W1669743413 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 11 |
| References cited | 39 |
Analyses of skill are widely used for assessing weather predictions, but the time scale and lack of validation data mean that it is not generally possible to investigate the predictive skill of today's climate models on the multidecadal time scale. The predictions made with early climate models can, however, be analyzed, and here we show that one such forecast did have skill. It seems reasonable to expect that predictions based on today's more advanced models will be at least as skillful. In general, assessments of predictions based on today's climate models should use Bayesian methods, in which the inevitable subjective decisions are made explicit. For the AR4, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) recommended the Bayesian paradigm for making estimates of uncertainty and probabilistic statements, and here we analyze the way in which uncertainty was actually addressed in the report. Analysis of the ensemble of general circulation models (GCMs) used in the last IPCC report suggests there is little evidence to support the popular notion that the multimodel ensemble is underdispersive, which would imply that the spread of the ensemble may be a reasonable starting point for estimating uncertainty. It is important that the field of uncertainty estimation is developed in order that the best use is made of current scientific knowledge in making predictions of future climate. At the same time, it is only by better understanding the processes and inclusion of these processes in the models, the best estimates of future climate will be closer to the truth. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. This article is categorized under: Climate Models and Modeling > Knowledge Generation with Models
Bayesian inference · Bayesian probability · Climate change · Climate model · Climatology · Econometrics · Economics · Estimation · General Circulation Model · Geography · Probabilistic logic · Scale (ratio · Atmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics · Climate variability and models · Computer Science · Meteorological Phenomena and Simulations · Artificial Intelligence
Assessing ExxonMobil’s global warming projections
Assessing climate model projections
Improving the contribution of climate model information to decision making
Communicating probabilistic information from climate model ensembles—lessons from numerical weather prediction
Diurnal changes in urban boundary layer environment induced by urban greening
Eemian paleoclimate zones and Neanderthal landscape-use
The Importance of Spatial Data to Open-Access National Archaeological Databases and the Development of Paleodemography Research
Visions before models
Can we trust climate models
Prospects for decadal climate prediction
Building confidence in climate model projections
Verification, Validation, and Confirmation of Numerical Models in the Earth Sciences
Global temperature change
The use of the multi-model ensemble in probabilistic climate projections
Uncertainty estimates in regional and global observed temperature changes
Quantification of modelling uncertainties in a large ensemble of climate change simulations
The utility of Earth system Models of Intermediate Complexity (Emics)
| Unique citing works | 11 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,69 |
| Citation span | 2010 - 2023 (14) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 11 |