Search

The atmospheric Green's function method is a technique for modeling the response of the atmosphere to changes in the spatial field of surface temperature. While early studies applied this method to changes in atmospheric circulation, it has also become an important tool to understand changes in radiative feedbacks due to evolving patterns of warming, a phenomenon called the "pattern effect." To better study this method, this paper presents a protocol for creating atmospheric Green's functions to serve as the basis for a model intercomparison project, GFMIP. The protocol has been developed using a series of sensitivity tests performed with the HadAM3 atmosphere‐only general circulation model, along with existing and new simulations from other models. Our preliminary results have uncovered nonlinearities in the response of the atmosphere to surface temperature changes, including an asymmetrical response to warming versus cooling patch perturbations, and a change in the dependence of the response on the magnitude and size of the patches. These nonlinearities suggest that the pattern effect may depend on the heterogeneity of warming as well as its location. These experiments have also revealed tradeoffs in experimental design between patch size, perturbation strength, and the length of control and patch simulations. The protocol chosen on the basis of these experiments balances scientific utility with the simulation time and setup required by the Green's function approach. Running these simulations will further our understanding of many aspects of atmospheric response, from the pattern effect and radiative feedbacks to changes in circulation, cloudiness, and precipitation. Plain Language Summary: Many properties of the atmosphere are affected by the temperature of the ocean surface. Knowing how strong these effects are would help us to better predict global warming. The response to a given surface warming depends on where the warming occurs. To account for this, researchers sometimes simulate the response to individual patches of warming and then assume the response to an arbitrary warming pattern can be summed together from these patch responses. This is sometimes called the atmospheric Green's function method, and it works well at recreating the atmospheric response to historical temperature changes. We are organizing a Green's Function Model Intercomparison Project (GFMIP), in which participants will apply the method consistently for many climate models. This paper presents the GFMIP protocol. In the course of developing this protocol, we found that the atmospheric response to warming is not proportional in all cases: the response to surface warming is not the opposite of the response to surface cooling; warming twice as much doesn't cause twice as much of a response; and making a patch of warming twice as large doesn't cause twice as large a response. GFMIP will help us figure out how to account for this nonlinearity. Key Points: The Green's Function Model Intercomparison Project (GFMIP) explores the atmospheric response to surface temperature patch perturbationsThis paper presents the GFMIP protocol, which was generated using insights from past studies and new sensitivity testsGreen's functions reconstruct the response to historical temperatures, but nonlinearities can affect responses to other warming patterns [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When the negatively buoyant air in the cloud downdrafts reaches the surface, it spreads out horizontally, producing cold pools. A cold pool can trigger new convective cells. However, when combined with the ambient vertical wind shear, it can also connect and upscale them into large mesoscale convective systems (MCS). Given the broad spectrum of scales of the atmospheric phenomenon involving the interaction between cold pools and the MCS, a parameterization was designed here. Then, it is coupled with a classical convection parameterization to be applied in an atmospheric model with an insufficient spatial resolution to explicitly resolve convection and the sub‐cloud layer. A new scalar quantity related to the deficit of moist static energy detrained by the downdrafts mass flux is proposed. This quantity is subject to grid‐scale advection, mixing, and a sink term representing dissipation processes. The model is then applied to simulate moist convection development over a large portion of tropical land in the Amazon Basin in a wet and dry‐to‐wet 10‐days period. Our results show that the cold pool edge parameterization improves the organization, longevity, propagation, and severity of simulated MCS over the Amazon and other different continental areas. Plain Language Summary: In nature, cold pools are formed by cold air masses descending from the low to mid‐troposphere in thunderstorms. When these drafts reach the surface, they spread out horizontally. A manifestation of cold pools is the relatively high speed at the gust front, which can lift environmental air producing new convective cells. Moreover, depending on ambient conditions, the cold pools may help organize the new convective cells, increasing their aggregation and forming the so‐called mesoscale convective systems (MCSs). MCSs, which cover hundreds to thousands of km2, significantly impact the global scale circulation, energy budget, hydrological cycle, and population safety. Forecasting MCSs is challenging for global circulation models (GCM) due to the broad spectrum of scales of the involved atmospheric phenomenon. The computational limitations, at present and for some time to come, do not allow running in real‐time GCMs, which explicitly solves all relevant scales of motion. This paper describes a methodology to account for essential interplays between cold pools edges and moist convection to be applied in the GCMs of weather and climate forecasting. We show that the method improves the model simulation of the main types of MCSs over the Amazon Basin and other continental areas. Key Points: A model scheme for including effect of cold pools edges in triggering new convective cells and storm propagation is presentedThe scheme is coupled with a convection parameterization and applied in the modeling of moist convective systemsThe method improves the organization, longevity, propagation, and severity of the simulated mesoscale convective systems [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is shown that a recently developed hybrid modeling approach that combines machine learning (ML) with an atmospheric global circulation model (AGCM) can serve as a basis for capturing atmospheric processes not captured by the AGCM. This power of the approach is illustrated by three examples from a decades‐long climate simulation experiment. The first example demonstrates that the hybrid model can produce sudden stratospheric warming, a dynamical process of nature not resolved by the low resolution AGCM component of the hybrid model. The second and third example show that introducing 6‐hr cumulative precipitation and sea surface temperature (SST) as ML‐based prognostic variables improves the precipitation climatology and leads to a realistic ENSO signal in the SST and atmospheric surface pressure. Plain Language Summary: This paper introduces and tests schemes for efficiently enabling significant expansion of the utility and scope of a recently introduced hybrid modeling technique that combines machine learning with an atmospheric global circulation model (AGCM). Simulation experiments are carried out with an implementation of the approach on a low resolution simplified AGCM. An examination of the simulated atmospheric circulation suggests that the hybrid model can capture dynamical process not captured by the AGCM. Moreover, the addition of precipitation and sea surface temperature (SST) as machine learning predicted physical quantities to the model improves the precipitation climatology and leads to a realistic El Niño‐La Niña signal in the SST and atmospheric surface pressure. Key Points: A hybrid system combining an atmospheric global circulation model (AGCM) with a machine‐learning component can capture processes not captured by the AGCMMachine learning provides a flexible framework to introduce additional prognostic variables into the hybrid modelThe prototype hybrid model tested in the paper is stable and has a realistic climate in decades‐long simulation experiments [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper evaluated and compared the performance of a statistical downscaling method and a dynamical downscaling method to simulate the spatial–temporal rainfall distribution. Outputs from RegCM4 Regional Climate Model (RCM) and the CanESM2 Atmosphere–Ocean General Circulation Model (AOGCM) were selected for the data scarce Gwadar‐Ormara basin, Pakistan. The evaluation was based on the climatological average and standard deviation for historic (1971–2000) and future (2041–2070) time periods under Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP) 4.5 and 8.5 scenarios. The performance evaluation showed that statistical downscaling is preferred to simulate and project rainfall patterns in the study area. Additionally, the Statistical DownScaling Model (SDSM) showed low R2 values in calibration and validation of the simulations with respect to observed data for the historic period. Overall, SDSM generated satisfactory results in simulating the monthly rainfall cycle of the entire basin. In this study, RegCM4 showed large rainfall errors and missed one rainfall season in the historic period. This study also explored whether the grid‐based rainfall time series of the Asian Precipitation—Highly Resolved Observational Daily Integration Towards Evaluation (APHRODITE) dataset could be used to enlarge and complement the sample of in situ observed rainfall time series. A spatial correlogram was used for observed and APHRODITE rainfall data to assess the consistency between the two data sources, which resulted in rejecting APHRODITE data. For the future time period (2041–2070) under RCPs 4.5 and 8.5 scenarios, rainfall projections did not show significant difference for both downscaling approaches. This may relate to the driving model (CanESM2 AOGCM) and not necessarily suggests poor performance of downscaling; either statistical or dynamical. Hence, the study recommends evaluating a multi‐model ensemble including other GCMs and RCMs for the same area of study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We develop a doubly periodic version of the Simple Convection‐Permitting E3SM Atmosphere Model (SCREAM) to provide an efficient configuration for this global convection permitting model (GCPM), akin to a single column model often found in conventional general circulation models. The design details are explained, in addition to the extensive case library associated with the doubly periodic SCREAM (DP‐SCREAM) configuration. We demonstrate that doubly periodic cloud resolving models are useful tools to explore the horizontal resolution sensitivity of GCPMs, in addition to replicating biases seen in the global models. Using DP‐SCREAM, we show that SCREAM exhibits behaviors of a scale aware model as it is able to naturally partition between sub‐grid scale (SGS) and resolved vertical transport across the gray zone of turbulence. We show that SCREAM is reasonably scale insensitive when run at resolutions from 1 to 5 km, but can exhibit sensitivity, particularly for the shallow convective regime, when run at resolutions approaching that of large eddy simulations. We conclude that SGS parameterization improvements are likely needed to reduce this scale sensitivity. Plain Language Summary: Advances in computational resources have allowed climate simulations to be performed with very high resolution, which provides higher quality results. However, these simulations require a lot of time and computer resources to perform, which makes these models difficult to use for the common scientist. In this paper we develop a high‐resolution configuration which focuses on a specific point on the globe, enabling it to run fast and to use minimal computational resources. This allows users and developers to gauge how the model may perform before doing a computationally intensive global simulation. We show that this faster configuration is a useful tool to replicate problems that are found in the global model and is a valuable way to assess sensitivities of the model, particularly pertaining to choices made in its resolution. Key Points: Doubly periodic configurations represent an efficient framework to supplement global cloud resolving modelsShallow convection is sensitive to horizontal resolution in Simple Convection‐Permitting E3SM Atmosphere Model (SCREAM) but stratiform clouds are more robustSCREAM exhibits the behaviors of a scale aware model and can represent a range of cloud regimes [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents the response to anthropogenic forcing in the GISS‐E2.1 climate models for the 21st century Shared Socioeconomic Pathways emission scenarios within the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). The experiments were performed using an updated and improved version of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) coupled general circulation model that includes two different versions for atmospheric composition: A non‐interactive version (NINT) with prescribed composition and a tuned aerosol indirect effect and the One‐Moment Aerosol model (OMA) version with fully interactive aerosols which includes a parameterized first indirect aerosol effect on clouds. The effective climate sensitivities are 3.0°C and 2.9°C for the NINT and OMA models, respectively. Each atmospheric version is coupled to two different ocean general circulation models: The GISS ocean model (E2.1‐G) and HYCOM (E2.1‐H). We describe the global mean responses for all future scenarios and spatial patterns of change for surface air temperature and precipitation for four of the marker scenarios: SSP1‐2.6, SSP2‐4.5, SSP4‐6.0, and SSP5‐8.5. By 2100, global mean warming ranges from 1.5°C to 5.2°C relative to 1,850–1,880 mean temperature. Two high‐mitigation scenarios SSP1‐1.9 and SSP1‐2.6 limit the surface warming to below 2°C by the end of the 21st century, except for the NINT E2.1‐H model that simulates 2.2°C of surface warming. For the high emission scenario SSP5‐8.5, the range is 4.6–5.2°C at 2100. Due to about 15% larger effective climate sensitivity and stronger transient climate response in both NINT and OMA CMIP6 models compared to CMIP5 versions, there is a stronger warming by 2100 in the SSP emission scenarios than in the comparable Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) scenarios in CMIP5. Changes in sea ice area are highly correlated to global mean surface air temperature anomalies and show steep declines in both hemispheres, with the largest sea ice area decreases occurring during September in the Northern Hemisphere in both E2.1‐G (−1.21 × 106 km2/°C) and E2.1‐H models (−0.94 × 106 km2/°C). Both coupled models project decreases in the Atlantic overturning stream function by 2100. The largest decrease of 56%–65% in the 21st century overturning stream function is produced in the warmest scenario SSP5‐8.5 in the E2.1‐G model, comparable to the reduction in the corresponding CMIP5 GISS‐E2 RCP8.5 simulation. Both low‐end scenarios SSP1‐1.9 and SSP1‐2.6 also simulate substantial reductions of the overturning (9%–37%) with slow recovery of about 10% by the end of the 21st century (relative to the maximum decrease at the middle of the 21st century). Plain Language Summary: The projections of future climate change are uncertain because they are dependent on different possible scenarios of human‐caused emissions and their interaction with natural forcings, internal climate variability, and inter‐model differences. This paper presents the results of the climate model of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, GISS‐E2.1, for the anthropogenically forced climate response for the twenty first century Shared Socioeconomic Pathways emission scenarios within the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). The sensitivity of the model response to different magnitudes of anthropogenic forcings in the twenty‐first‐century scenarios were performed using two different versions for the atmospheric composition and two different ocean general circulation models. Compared to CMIP5 GISS‐E2 versions, the CMIP6 GISS‐E2.1 climate model shows a stronger warming by 2100 in comparable scenarios due to larger effective climate sensitivity and transient climate response. Both climate models with two different ocean components project decreases in the Atlantic overturning stream function by 2100. Key Points: GISS E2.1 model with different configurations is used to carry out 134 Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP) experimentsGISS‐E2.1 climate model shows a stronger warming by 2,100 in comparable Representative Concentration Pathway scenarios in CMIP5 due to larger effective climate sensitivity and stronger transient climate responseBoth coupled models, E2.1‐G and E2.1‐H, project decreases in the Atlantic overturning stream function by 2100 with the largest decrease in the warmest scenario SSP5‐8.5 in the E2.1‐G model [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper describes an implementation of the combined hybrid‐parallel prediction (CHyPP) approach of Wikner et al. (2020), https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0005541 on a low‐resolution atmospheric global circulation model (AGCM). The CHyPP approach combines a physics‐based numerical model of a dynamical system (e.g., the atmosphere) with a computationally efficient type of machine learning (ML) called reservoir computing to construct a hybrid model. This hybrid atmospheric model produces more accurate forecasts of most atmospheric state variables than the host AGCM for the first 7–8 forecast days, and for even longer times for the temperature and humidity near the earth's surface. It also produces more accurate forecasts than a model based only on ML, or a model that combines linear regression, rather than ML, with the AGCM. The potential of the CHyPP approach for climate research is demonstrated by a 10‐year long hybrid model simulation of the atmospheric general circulation, which shows that the hybrid model can simulate the general circulation with substantially smaller systematic errors and more realistic variability than the host AGCM. Plain Language Summary: This paper presents a computationally efficient novel approach to construct a hybrid model of the atmosphere by combining a physics‐based model of the global atmospheric circulation with a machine learning component. The primary purpose of the hybrid model is to produce quantitative weather forecasts on the same grid as the physics‐based model. It is found that the hybrid model produces more accurate forecasts than the host physics‐based model for the first 7–8 forecast days for most forecast variables, and for even longer times for the temperature and humidity near the Earth's surface. Furthermore, the hybrid model is found to simulate the climate with substantially smaller systematic errors and more realistic temporal variability than the host model. Key Points: A hybrid model incorporating machine learning produces more accurate forecasts and more realistic climate than the host physics‐based modelThe hybrid model states are more realistically balanced and have substantially lower biases than the host modelThe hybrid model produces more realistic atmospheric variability than the host model at time scales shorter than about a week [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper describes the first implementation of the Δx = 3.25 km version of the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) global atmosphere model and its behavior in a 40‐day prescribed‐sea‐surface‐temperature simulation (January 20 through February 28, 2020). This simulation was performed as part of the DYnamics of the Atmospheric general circulation Modeled On Non‐hydrostatic Domains (DYAMOND) Phase 2 model intercomparison. Effective resolution is found to be ∼6× the horizontal dynamics grid resolution despite using a coarser grid for physical parameterizations. Despite this new model being in an immature and untuned state, moving to 3.25 km grid spacing solves several long‐standing problems with the E3SM model. In particular, Amazon precipitation is much more realistic, the frequency of light and heavy precipitation is improved, agreement between the simulated and observed diurnal cycle of tropical precipitation is excellent, and the vertical structure of tropical convection and coastal stratocumulus look good. In addition, the new model is able to capture the frequency and structure of important weather events (e.g., tropical cyclones, extratropical cyclones including atmospheric rivers, and cold air outbreaks). Interestingly, this model does not get rid of the erroneous southern branch of the intertropical convergence zone nor the tendency for strongest convection to occur over the Maritime Continent rather than the West Pacific, both of which are classic climate model biases. Several other problems with the simulation are identified, underscoring the fact that this model is a work in progress. Plain Language Summary: This paper describes the new global 3.25 km version of the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) atmosphere model and its behavior in a 40‐day northern‐hemisphere wintertime simulation. In exchange for huge computational expense, this high‐resolution model avoids many but not all biases common in lower‐resolution models. It also captures several types of extreme weather that would simply not be resolved in lower‐resolution models. Several opportunities for further development are identified. Key Points: Describes the Simple Cloud‐Resolving E3SM Atmosphere Model (SCREAM)SCREAM performs well in a 40‐day boreal winter simulation at 3.25 km ΔxResolving deep convection solves many long‐standing climate model biases [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Parameters in climate models are usually calibrated manually, exploiting only small subsets of the available data. This precludes both optimal calibration and quantification of uncertainties. Traditional Bayesian calibration methods that allow uncertainty quantification are too expensive for climate models; they are also not robust in the presence of internal climate variability. For example, Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods typically require O(105) model runs and are sensitive to internal variability noise, rendering them infeasible for climate models. Here we demonstrate an approach to model calibration and uncertainty quantification that requires only O(102) model runs and can accommodate internal climate variability. The approach consists of three stages: (a) a calibration stage uses variants of ensemble Kalman inversion to calibrate a model by minimizing mismatches between model and data statistics; (b) an emulation stage emulates the parameter‐to‐data map with Gaussian processes (GP), using the model runs in the calibration stage for training; (c) a sampling stage approximates the Bayesian posterior distributions by sampling the GP emulator with MCMC. We demonstrate the feasibility and computational efficiency of this calibrate‐emulate‐sample (CES) approach in a perfect‐model setting. Using an idealized general circulation model, we estimate parameters in a simple convection scheme from synthetic data generated with the model. The CES approach generates probability distributions of the parameters that are good approximations of the Bayesian posteriors, at a fraction of the computational cost usually required to obtain them. Sampling from this approximate posterior allows the generation of climate predictions with quantified parametric uncertainties. Plain Language Summary: Calibrating climate models with available data and quantifying their uncertainties are essential to make climate predictions accurate and actionable. A primary source of uncertainties in climate models comes from representation of small‐scale processes such as moist convection. Parameters in convection schemes and other parameterizations are usually calibrated by hand, using only a small fraction of data that are available. As a result, the calibration process may miss information about the small‐scale processes in question. This paper presents a proof‐of‐concept, in an idealized setting, of how parameters in climate models can be calibrated using a substantial fraction of the available data, and how uncertainties in the parameters can be quantified. We employ a new algorithm, called calibrate‐emulate‐sample (CES), which makes such calibration and uncertainty quantification feasible for computationally expensive climate models. CES reduces the hundreds of thousands of model runs usually required to quantify uncertainties in computer models to hundreds, thereby achieving about a factor 1,000 speedup. It leads to more robust calibration and uncertainty quantification in the presence of noise arising from chaotic variability of the climate system. We show how uncertainties in climate model parameters can be translated into quantified uncertainties of climate predictions through ensemble integrations. Key Points: We use time averaged climate statistics to calibrate convective parameters and quantify their uncertaintiesWe demonstrate use of the calibrate‐emulate‐sample algorithm to provide efficient calibration and uncertainty quantificationParametric uncertainty in climate predictions is quantified by sampling from the learnt convective parameter distribution [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study presents the version of the LMDZ global atmospheric model used as the atmospheric component of the Institut Pierre Simon Laplace coupled model (IPSL‐CM6A‐LR) to contribute to the 6th phase of the international Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). This LMDZ6A version includes original convective parameterizations that define the LMDZ "New Physics": a mass flux parameterization of the organized structures of the convective boundary layer, the "thermal plume model," and a parameterization of the cold pools created by reevaporation of convective rainfall. The vertical velocity associated with thermal plumes and gust fronts of cold pools are used to control the triggering and intensity of deep convection. Because of several shortcomings, the early version 5B of this New Physics was worse than the previous "Standard Physics" version 5A regarding several classical climate metrics. To overcome these deficiencies, version 6A includes new developments: a stochastic triggering of deep convection, a modification of the thermal plume model that allows the representation of stratocumulus and cumulus clouds in a unified framework, an improved parameterization of very stable boundary layers, and the modification of the gravity waves scheme targeting the quasi‐biennal oscillation in the stratosphere. These improvements to the physical content and a more well‐defined tuning strategy led to major improvements in the LMDZ6A version model climatology. Beyond the presentation of this particular model version and documentation of its climatology, the present paper underlines possible methodological pathways toward model improvement that can be shared across modeling groups. Plain Language Summary: The improvement of global numerical models is essential for the anticipation of future climate changes. We present significant advances in the physical content of a particular atmospheric model which contributes to the simulations of the Coupled Model Intercomparison project CMIP that feed reports from the IPCC. We document in particular the improvements of the representation through "parameterizations" of convective and cloudy processes. The article emphasizes the importance of strengthening the formalization of the methodology of development and tuning of models, so that new physical ideas can be translated into effective improvement of the climate representation. Key Points: The development strategy of the LMDZ6A global atmospheric circulation model is presentedImprovements with respect to previous versions are documented in the context of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project, CMIPThe improvements are based on significant changes of the physics content as well as on a better controlled tuning strategy [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Climate models rely on parameterizations of a variety of processes in the atmospheric physics, but a common concern is that the temporal resolution is too coarse to consistently resolve the behavior that individual parameterizations are designed to capture. This study examines timescales numerically derived from the Morrison‐Gettelman (MG2) microphysics as implemented within the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, version 1 (E3SMv1). Numerically relevant timescales in MG2 are derived by computing the eigenspectrum of its Jacobian. These timescales are found to often be smaller than the default 5 min time step used for MG2. The fast timescales are then heuristically connected to individual microphysics processes. By substepping a few particular rain processes within MG2, the time discretization error for those processes was considerably reduced with minimal additional expense to the overall microphysics. While this improvement has a substantial effect on the target processes and on the vertical distribution of stratiform‐derived rain within E3SMv1, the overall model climate is found to not be sensitive to MG2 time step. We hypothesize that this is because the surface climate does not depend strongly on certain process rates, especially MG2's rain evaporation rate. Plain Language Summary: The atmospheric components of climate models contain a number of physics parameterizations, subcomponents that are designed to capture particular aspects of the atmospheric physics. Cloud microphysics models are parameterizations designed to represent very small scale cloud processes, including phase changes and the formation of precipitation. The accuracy of these parameterizations depends on the model time step: A shorter time step typically requires more computational resources, but also improves the model's accuracy. This paper examines a particular microphysics model, MG2, used with a time step of 5 min in the E3SMv1 climate model. By linearizing MG2, we can find characteristic timescales associated with this model, which are often much shorter than 5 min. This suggests that the usual time step is too large to fully capture the physics that MG2 represents. We also experiment with using a shorter time step for parts of the rain physics and find that in many cases the rain mass is strongly affected. However, reducing the MG2 time step does not have much effect on the overall climate of E3SMv1. Key Points: MG2 contains several processes that are poorly resolved at a time step of 5 minSubstepping MG2's rain‐related processes changes their rates considerablyHowever, reducing MG2's time step within E3SM has little to no impact on the climate [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Quantifying and separating different sources of uncertainty helps to improve the understanding of the projected effects of climate change and can inform decision‐making in adaptation planning. This paper (1) evaluated four process‐based crop models; (2) assessed the effects of climate change on maize yield using climate change outputs from seven global climate models (GCMs) under three representative concentration pathways (RCPs); and (3) disaggregated the contributions of multiple crop models, GCMs and RCPs to overall uncertainty. All four models captured more than 80% of the variation in days to silking, maturity and yield, indicating reasonably reproduced observations. Similarly, the root mean square errors were moderate for days to silking and maturity (fewer than 4 days) and yield (0.5–0.7 t/ha). Overall, the results indicate that the models could assess grain yield at the study sites reasonably well. The results of the multiple models ensemble indicate that the maize yield will decrease by 9–11% with a probability of 72–80% on average during the period 2010–2039 relative to the baseline (1976–2005). The uncertainty in the maize‐yield simulations might arise mostly from the GCM models, followed by the crop models and RCPs, the contribution of which could be neglected relative to the other factors. Therefore, the use of a multiple crop model and a GCM ensemble is advisable in order to account properly for uncertainties in crop assessments. The uncertainty in maize‐yield simulations might arise mostly from global climate models (GCMs), followed by crop models and representative concentration pathways (RCPs), the contribution of which could be neglected relative to the other factors. Therefore, the use of a multiple crop model and a GCM ensemble is advisable in order to account properly for uncertainties in crop assessments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many general circulation models (GCMs) assume some heterogeneity of water amounts in their grid boxes and use probability density functions to parameterize cloud fractions CF and amounts of condensed water qc. Most GCM cloud schemes calculate the CF as the volume of the grid box that contains clouds (CFvol), whereas radiative fluxes primarily depend on the CF by surface (CFsurf), that is, the surface of the grid box covered by clouds when looking from above. This discrepancy matters as previous findings suggest that CFsurf is typically greater than CFvol by about 30%. In this paper we modify the single column model version of the LMDz GCM cloud scheme by introducing the vertical subgrid‐scale heterogeneity of water content. This allows to distinctly compute the two fractions, CFvol and CFsurf, as well as the amount of condensed water qc. This study is one of the first to take into account such vertical subgrid‐scale heterogeneity in a GCM cloud scheme. Three large eddy simulation cases of cumuliform boundary layer clouds are used to test and calibrate two different parameterizations. These new developments increase cloud cover by about 10% for the oceanic cases RICO and Barbados Oceanographic Meteorological Experiment and by up to 50% for the continental case ARM. The change in condensed water reduces the liquid water path by 10–20% and therefore the cloud opacity by 5–50%. These results show the potential of the new scheme to reduce the too few, too bright bias by increasing low‐level CF and decreasing cloud reflectance. Key Points: Most cloud schemes assume vertically homogeneous cloud fractions in GCM grid boxesThis approximation may induce an underestimation of cloud cover and overestimation of reflectanceWe parameterize 3‐D subgrid‐scale heterogeneities for low‐level clouds and reduce these biases [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]