Sentences with phrase «emergent constraint on»

[17] Cox, P. M., C. Huntingford, and M. S. Williamson, 2018: Emergent constraint on equilibrium climate sensitivity from global temperature variability.

[1] An emergent constraint on ECS is a quantitative measure of an aspect of GCMs» behaviour (a metric) that is well correlated with ECS values in an ensemble of GCMs and can be compared with observations, enabling the derivation of a narrower (constrained) range of GCM ECS values that correspond to GCMs whose metrics are statistically - consistent with the observations.

The dependence of sensitivity on the SST warming pattern, in GCMs at least, implies that even if a valid, strong emergent constraint on ECS in coupled GCMs were found, and there were no shortcomings in the atmospheric models of GCMs that satisfied the constraint, that would be insufficient to constrain real - world ECS.

It appears that you corrected your example Emergent Constraint on 25th Jan..

Conversely, many emergent constraints on ECS can be understood as encoding properties of shortwave low - cloud feedbacks (Qu et.

al 2016), results that may point the way toward mechanistic emergent constraints on high - cloud feedback.

Evaluating Emergent Constraints on Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity.

It is fairly clear that all potentially credible emergent constraints on ECS in climate models that have been investigated really constrain SW low cloud feedback (Qu et al. 2018).

Not exact matches

Bracegirdle, T. J. & Stephenson, D. B. On the robustness of emergent constraints used in multimodel climate change projections of Arctic warming.

There have been quite a number of papers published in recent years concerning «emergent constraints» on equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) in comprehensive global climate models (GCMs), of both the current (CMIP5) and previous (CMIP3) generations.

In Part 1 of this article the nature and validity of emergent constraints [1] on equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) in GCMs were discussed, drawing mainly on the analysis and assessment of 19 such constraints in Caldwell et al. (2018), [2] who concluded that only four of them were credible.

We shall see in this 3 - part article that emergent constraint approaches have the potential to offer useful insights into cloud behaviour, however the main focus will be on to what extent they narrow the uncertainty range of ECS in GCMs.

In Part 1 of this article the nature and validity of emergent constraints [i] on equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) in GCMs were discussed, drawing mainly on the analysis and assessment of 19 such constraints in Caldwell et al (2018; henceforth Caldwell), [ii] who concluded that only four of them were credible.

These transient constraints have tended to come in lower than the other estimates based on paleo - climate or emergent constraints, and thus have been embraced by (let's say) more «optimistic» commentators (though until the mismatches are resolved it would be premature to only favor only one class of results).

Finally, the relevance of constrained climate - change projections depends on statistical conditions that characterize emergent constraints.

In either case, assigning probabilities to ECS based on emergent constraints makes me uncomfortable.

But I do want to advocate for caution, as you nicely did in your 2014 paper on data mining for emergent constraints.

Given that there is no strong a priori knowledge about any linear relationship — this is why it is an «emergent» constraint — it seems inadvisable to make one's statistical inference strongly dependent on models that are not consistent with the data at hand.

Regarding the emergent constraint used in Brient & Schneider (2016), it is noteworthy that if the models are weighted by reference to their consistency with the data, regression of ECS on TLC reflection variability explains almost none of the intermodel ECS variation — the R - squared is negligible.

Your answer might depend on whether you find this literature on emergent constraints convincing or not.

In Part 1 of this article the nature and validity of emergent constraints [1] on equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) in GCMs were discussed, drawing mainly on the analysis and assessment of 19 such constraints in Caldwell et al. (2018), [2] who concluded that only four of them were credible.

There have been quite a number of papers published in recent years concerning «emergent constraints» on equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) in comprehensive global climate models (GCMs), of both the current (CMIP5) and previous (CMIP3) generations.

We shall see in this 3 - part article that emergent constraint approaches have the potential to offer useful insights into cloud behaviour, however the main focus will be on to what extent they narrow the uncertainty range of ECS in GCMs.

It seems doubtful that emergent constraints will be able to provide a useful, reliable constraint on real - world ECS unless and until GCMs are demonstrably able to simulate the climate system — ocean as well as atmosphere — with much greater fidelity, including as to SST warming patterns under multidecadal greenhouse gas driven warming.

[16] Qu, X., A. Hall, A. M. DeAngelis, M. D. Zelinka, S. A. Klein, H. Su, B. Tian, and C. Zhai, 2018: On the emergent constraints of climate sensitivity.

Part 1 of this article the nature and validity of emergent constraints [1] on equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) in GCMs were discussed, drawing mainly on the analysis and assessment of 19 such constraints in Caldwell et al. (2018), [2] who concluded that only four of them were credible.