Sentences with phrase «model sensitivity studies»

The original publication: Toohey, M., K. Krüger and C. Timmreck (2013), Volcanic sulfate deposition to Greenland and Antarctica: A modeling sensitivity study, J. Geophys.

The link is based on a single modelling sensitivity study (Rotstayn and Lohmann, 2002) which looked at only the changes in the indirect effect from the pre-industrial (ca. 1850) to the present day.

However, before they should be provided to the impacts communities as anything more than a model sensitivity study, they must be shown to have skill with respect to real world observations.

For example, a recent ice sheet model sensitivity study finds that incorporating the physical processes of hydrofracturing of ice and ice cliff failure increases their calculated sea level rise from 2 meters to 17 meters and reduces the potential time for West Antarctic collapse to decadal time scales.

2010 Jin, M., J.M. Shepherd, and W. Zheng, 2011: Urban Surface Temperature Reduction via the Urban Aerosol Direct Effect: A Remote Sensing and WRF Model Sensitivity Study.

Not exact matches

The study also explains why climate models usually simulate a lower sensitivity than can be detected in observations.

«We showed that the model accurately represents what we measured in cities, so now we can use it to conduct sensitivity studies, where only a single variable — the percentage of the city covered by impervious versus pervious materials — changes,» he said.

However, these models are unable to capture the increase in the sensitivity of carbon dioxide to tropical temperatures that is reported in this new study.

At the same time, new studies of climate sensitivity — the amount of warming expected for a doubling of carbon dioxide levels from 0.03 to 0.06 percent in the atmosphere — have suggested that most models are too sensitive.

The study, called «Molecular Determinants of Drug - Specific Sensitivity for Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) Exon 19 and 20 Mutants in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer,» and published online in the journal Oncotarget, demonstrates how computer modeling of EGFR mutations found in lung cancer can elucidate their molecular mechanism of action and consequently optimize the selection of therapeutic agents to treat patients.

To estimate how much the sensitivity varies, Gary Russell of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York and colleagues ran a climate model repeatedly.

Michael Mann, a meteorology professor at Penn State who was not involved with the study, said it's «speculative» but «plausible» that global climate models have been underestimating climate sensitivity by assuming too much cloud glaciation.

The study provides sensitivity analyses of key model assumptions and starting data uncertainty, indicating that the UN projections may have too small a range of uncertainty.

However, studies evaluating model performance on key observed processes and paleoclimate evidence suggest that the higher end of sensitivity is more likely, partially conflicting with the studies based on the recent transient observed warming.

In the study, the authors identified a monoclonal antibody to aP2 that lowered fasting blood glucose, increased insulin sensitivity, and lowered both fat mass and incidence of fatty liver in obese mouse models.

While the study conducts a sensitivity analysis that includes one scenario with higher levels of production subsidies, the fact that the model's outputs seem to barely register a tripling of production subsidies raises some questions, especially in light of the findings of the other recent U.S. study led by the Stockholm Environment Institute and EarthTrack described above.

Where climate sensitivity is estimated in studies involving comparing observations with values simulated by a forced climate model at varying parameter settings (see Appendix 9.

A sensitivity study for solar in the HadCM3 model showed that it probably underestimates solar with a factor 2 (see Stott ea.)

The current crop of models studied by the IPCC range from an equilibrium sensitivity of about 1.5 °C at the low end to about 5 °C at the high end.

Such studies can reasonably account for the observed variations as a response to solar and volcanic forcing (and a few secondary things) with energy balance climate models tuned to have a climate sensitivity equivalent to 2.5 C per doubling of CO2.

A 3 - D model for the Antarctic ice sheet: a sensitivity study on the glacial - interglacial contrast.

Advances in sensitivity and resolution as well as developments in modelling and analysis led to milestones in the experimental studies of chemical bonds using AFM.

«Sensitivity of Pine Island Glacier, West Antarctica, to changes in ice - shelf and basal conditions: a model study.»

Therefore, I wouldn't attach much credence, if any, to a modelling study that didn't explore the range of possibilities arising from such uncertainty in parameter values, and particularly in the value of something as crucial as the climate sensitivity parameter, as in this example.

This is a 0.9 ºC reduction from the sensitivity of 2.5 °C estimated in that predecessor study, which used the same climate model.

Given that clouds are known to be the primary source of uncertainty in climate sensitivity, how much confidence can you place in a study based on a model that doesn't even attempt to simulate clouds?

In general, as we get better and better data and as models include more and more feedbacks, are studies moving toward higher and higher sensitivities?

I use ocean and adjoint modelling as well as tools from uncertainty quantification to study sensitivities and uncertainties of ocean circulation.

They conclude, based on study of CMIP5 model output, that equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) is not a fixed quantity — as temperatures increase, the response is nonlinear, with a smaller effective ECS in the first decades of the experiments, increasing over time.

These models all suggest potentially serious limitations for this kind of study: UVic does not simulate the atmospheric feedbacks that determine climate sensitivity in more realistic models, but rather fixes the atmospheric part of the climate sensitivity as a prescribed model parameter (surface albedo, however, is internally computed).

Climate model studies and empirical analyses of paleoclimate data can provide estimates of the amplification of climate sensitivity caused by slow feedbacks, excluding the singular mechanisms that caused the hyperthermal events.

«We indicated 23 years ago — in our 1994 Nature article — that climate models had the atmosphere's sensitivity to CO2 much too high,» said Christy, the lead author in the study, which has been accepted for publication in the 2017 fourth quarter edition of the Asia - Pacific Journal of Atmospheric Sciences and is available online.

In order to check the sensitivity of NCES results to the particular methodology that was employed, we first replicated the results from the NCES study's primary model.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the sensitivity of value - added modeling to the way an underlying vertical score scale has been created.

Other AgMIP initiatives include global gridded modeling, data and information technology (IT) tool development, simulation of crop pests and diseases, site - based crop - climate sensitivity studies, and aggregation and scaling.

al., 2015) study demonstrates that compensation models may impact the flow - performance sensitivity.

The aim of this study is to investigate the impact of small - scale atmospheric fluctuations on the modeled climate sensitivity to increased CO2 concentration.

One can temper that with studies of paleoclimate sensitivity, but the ensemble results still should be borne in mind, since doubling CO2 takes us into a climate that has no real precendent in the part of the climate record which has been used for exploring model sensitivity, and in many regards may not have any real precedent in the entire history of the planet (in terms of initial condition and rapidity of GHG increase).

Even the admirable Revkin doesn't get it quite right: On horizontal surfaces, observations and modeling show a role for melting in both the baseline ablation and the sensitivity of ablation to precipitation and temperature; melting is the dominant ablation mechanism on vertical ice cliffs; and though Kaser et al find «no evidence» about rising temperatures, it is only because the in situ studies don't cover a long enough period to detect trends.

Obviously, there is need for significant increases in resolution of the RCMs, as past studies indicate a significant sensitivity of results to model resolution.

But what the GSL now says is that geological evidence from palaeoclimatology (studies of past climate change) suggests that if longer - term factors are taken into account, such as the decay of large ice sheets, the Earth's sensitivity to a doubling of CO2 could itself be double that predicted by most climate models.

One of the criticisms of the study has indeed been that many of the high - sensitivity models may well have been unrealistic; the criteria for checking were weak — William]

Hence, we feel that the most important result of the study of Stainforth et al. is that by far most of the models had climate sensitivities between 2ºC and 4ºC, giving additional support to the widely accepted range (Update: As mentioned in the follow up post, this clustering is mainly a function of the sensitivity of the original model and the random nature of the perturbations).

Now you get it correct: I claim that the linear response models («sensitivity studies») are fundamentally insufficient for the purpose of prediction and «policy making».

In general, as we get better and better data and as models include more and more feedbacks, are studies moving toward higher and higher sensitivities?

Interestingly, our results are actually pretty consistent with a lot of the recent literature on sensitivity: All studies comparing simple models with recent climate change (from Andronova and Schlesinger, 2001, onwards) find high sensitivities (more than 8K, say) are consistent (at the few - percent level) with the observed record unless they are ruled out a priori.

The current crop of models studied by the IPCC range from an equilibrium sensitivity of about 1.5 °C at the low end to about 5 °C at the high end.

A detailed reanalysis is presented of a «Bayesian» climate parameter study (Forest et al., 2006) that estimates climate sensitivity (ECS) jointly with effective ocean diffusivity and aerosol forcing, using optimal fingerprints to compare multi-decadal observations with simulations by the MIT 2D climate model at varying settings of the three climate parameters.

Though the study's authors concede the study is limited by the «availability of data and the necessity to make assumptions to model likely scenarios,» they carried out sensitivity analysis to assess the resuts, and also found that in all scenarios tested there was a net benefit (i.e. increased longevity) for Bicing users.

They do cite a study by Lindzen and Choi, which has shown, based on ERBE satellite observations, that the net impact of a doubling of CO2 including all feedbacks is likely to be significantly lower than the model - based estimates by Myhre for sensitivity without feedbacks.