Geoscientific Model Development最新文献

{"title":"Modeling sensitivities of thermally and hydraulically driven ice stream surge cycling","authors":"Kevin Hank, Lev Tarasov, Elisa Mantelli","doi":"10.5194/gmd-16-5627-2023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5627-2023","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Modeling ice sheet instabilities is a numerical challenge of potentially high real-world relevance. Yet, differentiating between the impacts of model physics, numerical implementation choices, and numerical errors is not straightforward. Here, we use an idealized North American geometry and climate representation (similarly to the HEINO (Heinrich Event INtercOmparison) experiments – Calov et al., 2010) to examine the process and numerical sensitivity of ice stream surge cycling in ice flow models. Through sensitivity tests, we identify some numerical requirements for a more robust model configuration for such contexts. To partly address model-specific dependencies, we use both the Glacial Systems Model (GSM) and the Parallel Ice Sheet Model (PISM). We show that modeled surge characteristics are resolution dependent, though they converge (decreased differences between resolutions) at finer horizontal grid resolutions. Discrepancies between fine and coarse horizontal grid resolutions can be reduced by incorporating sliding at sub-freezing temperatures. The inclusion of basal hydrology increases the ice volume lost during surges, whereas the dampening of basal-temperature changes due to a bed thermal model leads to a decrease.","PeriodicalId":12799,"journal":{"name":"Geoscientific Model Development","volume":"74 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136356857","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Emulating lateral gravity wave propagation in a global chemistry–climate model (EMAC v2.55.2) through horizontal flux redistribution","authors":"Roland Eichinger, Sebastian Rhode, Hella Garny, Peter Preusse, Petr Pisoft, Aleš Kuchař, Patrick Jöckel, Astrid Kerkweg, Bastian Kern","doi":"10.5194/gmd-16-5561-2023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5561-2023","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. The columnar approach of gravity wave (GW) parameterisations in weather and climate models has been identified as a potential reason for dynamical biases in middle-atmospheric dynamics. For example, GW momentum flux (GWMF) discrepancies between models and observations at 60∘ S arising through the lack of horizontal orographic GW propagation are suspected to cause deficiencies in representing the Antarctic polar vortex. However, due to the decomposition of the model domains onto different computing tasks for parallelisation, communication between horizontal grid boxes is computationally extremely expensive, making horizontal propagation of GWs unfeasible for global chemistry–climate simulations. To overcome this issue, we present a simplified solution to approximate horizontal GW propagation through redistribution of the GWMF at one single altitude by means of tailor-made redistribution maps. To generate the global redistribution maps averaged for each grid box, we use a parameterisation describing orography as a set of mountain ridges with specified location, orientation and height combined with a ray-tracing model describing lateral propagation of so-generated mountain waves. In the global chemistry–climate model (CCM) EMAC (ECHAM MESSy Atmospheric Chemistry), these maps then allow us to redistribute the GW momentum flux horizontally at one level, obtaining an affordable overhead of computing resources. The results of our simulations show GWMF and drag patterns that are horizontally more spread out than with the purely columnar approach; GWs are now also present above the ocean and regions without mountains. In this paper, we provide a detailed description of how the redistribution maps are computed and how the GWMF redistribution is implemented in the CCM. Moreover, an analysis shows why 15 km is the ideal altitude for the redistribution. First results with the redistributed orographic GWMF provide clear evidence that the redistributed GW drag in the Southern Hemisphere has the potential to modify and improve Antarctic polar vortex dynamics, thereby paving the way for enhanced credibility of CCM simulations and projections of polar stratospheric ozone.","PeriodicalId":12799,"journal":{"name":"Geoscientific Model Development","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134944295","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Comparing the Performance of Julia on CPUs versus GPUs and Julia-MPI versus Fortran-MPI: a case study with MPAS-Ocean (Version 7.1)","authors":"Siddhartha Bishnu, Robert R. Strauss, Mark R. Petersen","doi":"10.5194/gmd-16-5539-2023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5539-2023","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Some programming languages are easy to develop at the cost of slow execution, while others are fast at runtime but much more difficult to write. Julia is a programming language that aims to be the best of both worlds – a development and production language at the same time. To test Julia's utility in scientific high-performance computing (HPC), we built an unstructured-mesh shallow water model in Julia and compared it against an established Fortran-MPI ocean model, the Model for Prediction Across Scales–Ocean (MPAS-Ocean), as well as a Python shallow water code. Three versions of the Julia shallow water code were created: for single-core CPU, graphics processing unit (GPU), and Message Passing Interface (MPI) CPU clusters. Comparing identical simulations revealed that our first version of the Julia model was 13 times faster than Python using NumPy, where both used an unthreaded single-core CPU. Further Julia optimizations, including static typing and removing implicit memory allocations, provided an additional 10–20× speed-up of the single-core CPU Julia model. The GPU-accelerated Julia code was almost identical in terms of performance to the MPI parallelized code on 64 processes, an unexpected result for such different architectures. Parallelized Julia-MPI performance was identical to Fortran-MPI MPAS-Ocean for low processor counts and ranges from 2× faster to 2× slower for higher processor counts. Our experience is that Julia development is fast and convenient for prototyping but that Julia requires further investment and expertise to be competitive with compiled codes. We provide advice on Julia code optimization for HPC systems.","PeriodicalId":12799,"journal":{"name":"Geoscientific Model Development","volume":"97 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134975561","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"All aboard! Earth system investigations with the CH2O-CHOO TRAIN v1.0","authors":"Tyler Kukla, Daniel E. Ibarra, Kimberly V. Lau, Jeremy K. C. Rugenstein","doi":"10.5194/gmd-16-5515-2023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5515-2023","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Models of the carbon cycle and climate on geologic (>104-year) timescales have improved tremendously in the last 50 years due to parallel advances in our understanding of the Earth system and the increase in computing power to simulate its key processes. Still, balancing the Earth system's complexity with a model's computational expense is a primary challenge in model development. Simulations spanning hundreds of thousands of years or more generally require a reduction in the complexity of the climate system, omitting features such as radiative feedbacks, shifts in atmospheric circulation, and the expansion and decay of ice sheets, which can have profound effects on the long-term carbon cycle. Here, we present a model for climate and the long-term carbon cycle that captures many fundamental features of global climate while retaining the computational efficiency needed to simulate millions of years of time. The Carbon–H2O Coupled HydrOlOgical model with Terrestrial Runoff And INsolation, or CH2O-CHOO TRAIN, couples a one-dimensional (latitudinal) moist static energy balance model of climate with a model for rock weathering and the long-term carbon cycle. The CH2O-CHOO TRAIN is capable of running million-year-long simulations in about 30 min on a laptop PC. The key advantages of this framework are (1) it simulates fundamental climate forcings and feedbacks; (2) it accounts for geographic configuration; and (3) it is flexible, equipped to easily add features, change the strength of feedbacks, and prescribe conditions that are often hard-coded or emergent properties of more complex models, such as climate sensitivity and the strength of meridional heat transport. We show how climate variables governing temperature and the water cycle can impact long-term carbon cycling and climate, and we discuss how the magnitude and direction of this impact can depend on boundary conditions like continental geography. This paper outlines the model equations, presents a sensitivity analysis of the climate responses to varied climatic and carbon cycle perturbations, and discusses potential applications and next stops for the CH2O-CHOO TRAIN.","PeriodicalId":12799,"journal":{"name":"Geoscientific Model Development","volume":"181 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135591685","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Evaluating WRF-GC v2.0 predictions of boundary layer height and vertical ozone profile during the 2021 TRACER-AQ campaign in Houston, Texas","authors":"Xueying Liu, Yuxuan Wang, Shailaja Wasti, Wei Li, Ehsan Soleimanian, James Flynn, Travis Griggs, Sergio Alvarez, John T. Sullivan, Maurice Roots, Laurence Twigg, Guillaume Gronoff, Timothy Berkoff, Paul Walter, Mark Estes, Johnathan W. Hair, Taylor Shingler, Amy Jo Scarino, Marta Fenn, Laura Judd","doi":"10.5194/gmd-16-5493-2023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5493-2023","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. The TRacking Aerosol Convection ExpeRiment – Air Quality (TRACER-AQ) campaign probed Houston air quality with a comprehensive suite of ground-based and airborne remote sensing measurements during the intensive operating period in September 2021. Two post-frontal high-ozone episodes (6–11 and 23–26 September) were recorded during the aforementioned period. In this study, we evaluated the simulation of the planetary boundary layer (PBL) height and the vertical ozone profile by a high-resolution (1.33 km) 3-D photochemical model, the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF)-driven GEOS-Chem (WRF-GC). We evaluated the PBL heights with a ceilometer at the coastal site La Porte and the airborne High Spectral Resolution Lidar 2 (HSRL-2) flying over urban Houston and adjacent waters. Compared with the ceilometer at La Porte, the model captures the diurnal variations in the PBL heights with a very strong temporal correlation (R>0.7) and ±20 % biases. Compared with the airborne HSRL-2, the model exhibits a moderate to strong spatial correlation (R=0.26–0.68), with ±20 % biases during the noon and afternoon hours during ozone episodes. For land–water differences in PBL heights, the water has shallower PBL heights compared to land. The model predicts larger land–water differences than the observations because the model consistently underestimates the PBL heights over land compared to water. We evaluated vertical ozone distributions by comparing the model against vertical measurements from the TROPospheric OZone lidar (TROPOZ), the HSRL-2, and ozonesondes, as well as surface measurements at La Porte from a model 49i ozone analyzer and one Continuous Ambient Monitoring Station (CAMS). The model underestimates free-tropospheric ozone (2–3 km aloft) by 9 %–22 % but overestimates near-ground ozone (<50 m aloft) by 6 %-39 % during the two ozone episodes. Boundary layer ozone (0.5–1 km aloft) is underestimated by 1 %–11 % during 8–11 September but overestimated by 0 %–7 % during 23–26 September. Based on these evaluations, we identified two model limitations, namely the single-layer PBL representation and the free-tropospheric ozone underestimation. These limitations have implications for the predictivity of ozone's vertical mixing and distribution in other models.","PeriodicalId":12799,"journal":{"name":"Geoscientific Model Development","volume":"60 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135200794","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Simulation of a fully coupled 3D glacial isostatic adjustment – ice sheet model for the Antarctic ice sheet over a glacial cycle","authors":"Caroline J. van Calcar, Roderik S. W. van de Wal, Bas Blank, Bas de Boer, Wouter van der Wal","doi":"10.5194/gmd-16-5473-2023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5473-2023","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) has a stabilizing effect on the evolution of the Antarctic ice sheet by reducing the grounding line migration following ice melt. The timescale and strength of this feedback depends on the spatially varying viscosity of the Earth's mantle. Most studies assume a relatively long and laterally homogenous response time of the bedrock. However, the mantle viscosity is spatially variable, with a high mantle viscosity beneath East Antarctica and a low mantle viscosity beneath West Antarctica. For this study, we have developed a new method to couple a 3D GIA model and an ice sheet model to study the interaction between the solid Earth and the Antarctic ice sheet during the last glacial cycle. With this method, the ice sheet model and GIA model exchange ice thickness and bedrock elevation during a fully coupled transient experiment. The feedback effect is taken into account with a high temporal resolution, where the coupling time steps between the ice sheet and GIA model are 5000 years over the glaciation phase and vary between 500 and 1000 years over the deglaciation phase of the last glacial cycle. During each coupling time step, the bedrock elevation is adjusted at every ice sheet model time step, and the deformation is computed for a linearly changing ice load. We applied the method using the ice sheet model ANICE and a 3D GIA finite element model. We used results from a regional seismic model for Antarctica embedded in the global seismic model SMEAN2 to determine the patterns in the mantle viscosity. The results of simulations over the last glacial cycle show that differences in mantle viscosity of an order of magnitude can lead to differences in the grounding line position up to 700 km and to differences in ice thickness of the order of 2 km for the present day near the Ross Embayment. These results underline and quantify the importance of including local GIA feedback effects in ice sheet models when simulating the Antarctic ice sheet evolution over the last glacial cycle.","PeriodicalId":12799,"journal":{"name":"Geoscientific Model Development","volume":"87 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135537316","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Canadian Atmospheric Model version 5 (CanAM5.0.3)","authors":"Jason Neil Steven Cole, Knut von Salzen, Jiangnan Li, John Scinocca, David Plummer, Vivek Arora, Norman McFarlane, Michael Lazare, Murray MacKay, Diana Verseghy","doi":"10.5194/gmd-16-5427-2023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5427-2023","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. The Canadian Atmospheric Model version 5 (CanAM5) is the component of Canadian Earth System Model version 5 (CanESM5) which models atmospheric processes and coupling of the atmosphere with land and lake models. Described in this paper are the main features of CanAM5, with a focus on changes relative to the last major scientific version of the model (CanAM4). These changes are mostly related to improvements in radiative transfer, clouds, and aerosol parameterizations, as well as a major upgrade of the land surface and land carbon cycle models and addition of a small lake model. In addition to changes to parameterizations and models, changes in the adjustable parameters between CanAM4 and CanAM5 are documented. Finally, the mean climatology simulated by CanAM5 for the present day is evaluated against observations and compared with that simulated by CanAM4. Although many of the aspects of the simulated climate are similar between CanAM4 and CanAM5, there is a reduction in precipitation and temperature biases over the Amazonian basin, global cloud fraction biases, and solar and thermal cloud radiative effects, all of which are improvements relative to observations.","PeriodicalId":12799,"journal":{"name":"Geoscientific Model Development","volume":"58 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136061907","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Barents-2.5km v2.0: an operational data-assimilative coupled ocean and sea ice ensemble prediction model for the Barents Sea and Svalbard","authors":"Johannes Röhrs, Yvonne Gusdal, Edel S. U. Rikardsen, Marina Durán Moro, Jostein Brændshøi, Nils Melsom Kristensen, Sindre Fritzner, Keguang Wang, Ann Kristin Sperrevik, Martina Idžanović, Thomas Lavergne, Jens Boldingh Debernard, Kai H. Christensen","doi":"10.5194/gmd-16-5401-2023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5401-2023","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. An operational ocean and sea ice forecast model, Barents-2.5, is implemented for short-term forecasting at the coast off northern Norway, the Barents Sea, and the waters around Svalbard. Primary forecast parameters are sea ice concentration (SIC), sea surface temperature (SST), and ocean currents. The model also provides input data for drift modeling of pollutants, icebergs, and search-and-rescue applications in the Arctic domain. Barents-2.5 has recently been upgraded to include an ensemble prediction system with 24 daily realizations of the model state. SIC, SST, and in situ hydrography are constrained through the ensemble Kalman filter (EnKF) data assimilation scheme executed in daily forecast cycles with a lead time up to 66 h. Here, we present the model setup and validation in terms of SIC, SST, in situ hydrography, and ocean and ice velocities. In addition to the model's forecast capabilities for SIC and SST, the performance of the ensemble in representing the model's uncertainty and the performance of the EnKF in constraining the model state are discussed.","PeriodicalId":12799,"journal":{"name":"Geoscientific Model Development","volume":"87 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136062035","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Enhancing the representation of water management in global hydrological models","authors":"Guta Wakbulcho Abeshu, Fuqiang Tian, Thomas Wild, Mengqi Zhao, Sean Turner, A. F. M. Kamal Chowdhury, Chris R. Vernon, Hongchang Hu, Yuan Zhuang, Mohamad Hejazi, Hong-Yi Li","doi":"10.5194/gmd-16-5449-2023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5449-2023","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. This study enhances an existing global hydrological model (GHM), Xanthos, by adding a new water management module that distinguishes between the operational characteristics of irrigation, hydropower, and flood control reservoirs. We remapped reservoirs in the Global Reservoir and Dam (GRanD) database to the 0.5∘ spatial resolution in Xanthos so that a single lumped reservoir exists per grid cell, which yielded 3790 large reservoirs. We implemented unique operation rules for each reservoir type, based on their primary purposes. In particular, hydropower reservoirs have been treated as flood control reservoirs in previous GHM studies, while here, we determined the operation rules for hydropower reservoirs via optimization that maximizes long-term hydropower production. We conducted global simulations using the enhanced Xanthos and validated monthly streamflow for 91 large river basins, where high-quality observed streamflow data were available. A total of 1878 (296 hydropower, 486 irrigation, and 1096 flood control and others) out of the 3790 reservoirs are located in the 91 basins and are part of our reported results. The Kling–Gupta efficiency (KGE) value (after adding the new water management) is ≥ 0.5 and ≥ 0.0 in 39 and 81 basins, respectively. After adding the new water management module, model performance improved for 75 out of 91 basins and worsened for only 7. To measure the relative difference between explicitly representing hydropower reservoirs and representing hydropower reservoirs as flood control reservoirs (as is commonly done in other GHMs), we use the normalized root mean square error (NRMSE) and the coefficient of determination (R2). Out of the 296 hydropower reservoirs, the NRMSE is &gt; 0.25 (i.e., considering 0.25 to represent a moderate difference) for over 44 % of the 296 reservoirs when comparing both the simulated reservoir releases and storage time series between the two simulations. We suggest that correctly representing hydropower reservoirs in GHMs could have important implications for our understanding and management of freshwater resource challenges at regional-to-global scales. This enhanced global water management modeling framework will allow the analysis of future global reservoir development and management from a coupled human–earth system perspective.","PeriodicalId":12799,"journal":{"name":"Geoscientific Model Development","volume":"72 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136060155","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Teddy tool v1.1: temporal disaggregation of daily climate model data for climate impact analysis","authors":"Florian Zabel, Benjamin Poschlod","doi":"10.5194/gmd-16-5383-2023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5383-2023","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Climate models provide the required input data for global or regional climate impact analysis in temporally aggregated form, often in daily resolution to save space on data servers. Today, many impact models work with daily data; however, sub-daily climate information is becoming increasingly important for more and more models from different sectors, such as the agricultural, water, and energy sectors. Therefore, the open-source Teddy tool (temporal disaggregation of daily climate model data) has been developed to disaggregate (temporally downscale) daily climate data to sub-daily hourly values. Here, we describe and validate the temporal disaggregation, which is based on the choice of daily climate analogues. In this study, we apply the Teddy tool to disaggregate bias-corrected climate model data from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). We choose to disaggregate temperature, precipitation, humidity, longwave radiation, shortwave radiation, surface pressure, and wind speed. As a reference, globally available bias-corrected hourly reanalysis WFDE5 (WATCH Forcing Data methodology applied to ERA5) data from 1980–2019 are used to take specific local and seasonal features of the empirical diurnal profiles into account. For a given location and day within the climate model data, the Teddy tool screens the reference data set to find the most similar meteorological day based on rank statistics. The diurnal profile of the reference data is then applied on the climate model. The physical dependency between variables is preserved, since the diurnal profile of all variables is taken from the same, most similar meteorological day of the historical reanalysis dataset. Mass and energy are strictly preserved by the Teddy tool to exactly reproduce the daily values from the climate models. For evaluation, we aggregate the hourly WFDE5 data to daily values and apply the Teddy tool for disaggregation. Thereby, we compare the original hourly data with the data disaggregated by Teddy. We perform a sensitivity analysis of different time window sizes used for finding the most similar meteorological day in the past. In addition, we perform a cross-validation and autocorrelation analysis for 30 globally distributed samples around the world that represent different climate zones. The validation shows that Teddy is able to reproduce historical diurnal courses with high correlations &gt;0.9 for all variables, except for wind speed (&gt;0.75) and precipitation (&gt;0.5). We discuss the limitations of the method regarding the reproduction of precipitation extremes, interday connectivity, and disaggregation of end-of-century projections with strong warming. Depending on the use case, sub-daily data provided by the Teddy tool could make climate impact assessments more robust and reliable.","PeriodicalId":12799,"journal":{"name":"Geoscientific Model Development","volume":"399 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136236352","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}