CMIP5全球气候模式对青藏高原地区气候模拟能力评估

青藏高原是气候变化的敏感和脆弱区,全球气候模式对于这一地区气候态的模拟能力如何尚不清楚。为此,本文使用国际耦合模式比较计划第五阶段（CMIP5）的历史模拟试验数据,评估了44 个全球气候模式对1986~2005 年青藏高原地区地表气温和降水两个基本气象要素的模拟能力。结果表明,CMIP5 模式低估了青藏高原地区年和季节平均地表气温,年均平均偏低2.3℃,秋季和冬季冷偏差相对更大;模式可较好地模拟年和季节平均地表气温分布型,但模拟的空间变率总体偏大;地形效应校正能够有效订正地表气温结果。CMIP5 模式对青藏高原地区降水模拟能力较差。尽管它们能够模拟出年均降水自西北向东南渐增的分布型,但模拟的年和季节降水量普遍偏大,年均降水平均偏多1.3 mm d-1,这主要是源于春季和夏季降水被高估。同时,模式模拟的年和季节降水空间变率也普遍大于观测值,尤其表现在春季和冬季。相比较而言,44 个模式集合平均性能总体上要优于大多数单个模式;等权重集合平均方案要优于中位数平均;对择优挑选的模式进行集合平均能够提高总体的模拟能力,其中对降水模拟的改进更为显著。     

通用地球系统模式对亚洲夏季风降水的模拟能力评估

通过与观测/再分析资料和参加第五次耦合模式比较计划(CMIP5)的模式模拟结果进行对比,评估了通用地球系统模式(CESM,1.0.3版本)对亚洲夏季风降水的模拟能力。结果表明:CESM能够合理地模拟出亚洲夏季风降水的气候平均态,但与其他CMIP5模式模拟结果类似,对中国东南地区降水模拟偏少,而对中国西部高原地区降水模拟偏多;CESM可以再现亚洲季风区降水冬弱夏强、雨带北进南退的季节变化特征,其模拟偏差具有区域性和季节性差异;从EOF分析结果来看,CESM能够模拟出亚洲夏季风降水的时空变化特征,且能较好地抓住亚洲夏季风降水与厄尔尼诺-南方涛动(El Ni?o-Southern Oscillation,简称ENSO)的相关关系。总的说来,CESM对亚洲夏季风降水的模拟是合理的,模拟水平与4个最好的CMIP5模式相当。     

CMIP5全球气候模式对中国地区干旱变化模拟能力评估

利用东亚地区1961～2005年高分辨率（0．5°×0．5°）降水格点数据和参加CMIP5的42个全球气候模式数值模拟结果,通过对简单降水强度指数（降水距平百分率）的计算,对比分析了观测和多模式集合的中国地区干旱面积、干旱频率的时空分布以及干旱分布型的变化,评估了全球气候模式的模拟能力。结果表明：多个全球气候模式的集合结果对中国区域的干旱变化特征有一定的模拟能力,能较好地模拟出中国年平均干旱指数的时间变化趋势,但模拟的干旱强度偏弱;多模式集合模拟的严重干旱面积与观测值的变化趋势基本一致,与观测相比,模拟的长江以南干旱强度偏强,西北干旱强度偏弱;通过EOF的分析表明,多模式集合可以较好地模拟出西北与长江以南呈反位相及我国东部地区的“旱-涝-旱”或“涝-旱-涝”的分布型。     

CMIP6全球气候模式对中国极端降水模拟能力的评估及其与CMIP5的比较

对CMIP6全球气候模式在中国地区极端降水的模拟能力进行了综合评估。基于CN05.1观测数据集和32个CMIP6全球气候模式的降水数据,采用8个常用极端降水指数对极端降水进行了定量描述。研究结果表明,在极端降水的气候平均态方面,CMIP6多模式集合对1961—2005年中国地区区域平均的8个极端降水指数模拟的平均相对误差为29.94%,相较CMIP5降低了2.95个百分点。极端降水的气候变率方面,CMIP6多模式集合对区域平均的8个极端降水指数模拟的平均相对误差为10.10%,相较CMIP5降低5.45个百分点。此外,利用TS评分进行模式间比较,CMIP6的平均分（0.78）高于CMIP5（0.75）,且模拟能力排名前五的模式中CMIP6占4个。对比14个同源模式的TS评分可以发现,CMIP6（0.91）相对于CMIP5（0.68）的模拟能力显著提高。进一步研究发现,CMIP6相对于CMIP5对不同区域极端降水模拟能力的改进有所区别:CMIP6对干旱区平均的气候态和变率方面改进明显,而对于湿润区的改进主要表现在对极端降水空间相关模拟能力的提高。综上,在中国地区,CMIP6相较于CMIP5对极端降水的模拟能力总体上有提升。      

CMIP5气候模式对东亚夏季平均环流场模拟能力的评估

利用第五次耦合模式比较计划(Phase 5 of Coupled Model Intercomparison Project,CMIP5)提供的30个全球气候模式模拟的1961~2005年的夏季逐月环流场资料及同期NCEP再分析资料,引入泰勒图及各种评估指标,探讨全球气候模式对东亚夏季平均大气环流场的模拟能力,寻求具有较好东亚夏季环流场模拟能力的气候模式。结果表明:1)全球气候模式能够模拟出东亚夏季平均大气环流的基本特征,CMIP5模式的总体模拟能力较第三次耦合模式比较计划(CMIP3)有较大程度的提高,如CMIP5模式对东亚大部分地区夏季海平面气压(Sea Level Pressure,SLP)场的模拟偏差在6 h Pa以内。2)模式对不同层次环流场的模拟能力存在差异,500 h Pa高度场的模拟能力最强,其次为100 h Pa高度场、850 h Pa风场,SLP场最弱;对东亚夏季主要环流系统的模拟对比发现,模式对印度热低压及东伸槽强度指数的模拟能力最好。3)综合CMIP5模式对东亚夏季各层次平均环流场以及主要环流系统的模拟能力,发现模拟较好的5个模式为CESM1-CAM5、MPI-ESM-MR、MPI-ESM-LR、MPI-ESM-P和Can ESM2。4)相对于单一模式,多模式集合平均(MME)模拟能力较强,但较优选的前5个模式集合平均的模拟能力弱。     

CMIP5全球气候模式对1981—2005年东北地表温度的模拟分析

利用中国东北1981—2005年173个气象台站观测的月平均地表(0 cm)温度资料和参加IPCC第五次评估报告的43个全球气候模式模拟结果,对比分析了CMIP5耦合气候模式对中国东北地区地表温度的模拟性能。结果表明：大部分气候模式模拟结果都能较好的再现研究区域的地表温度时空变化,与月观测的时间相关系数均高于095,对年际变化模拟能力稍差,大部分模式模拟结果在整个研究时段均表现出冷偏差。空间分布显示,CMIP5模式能够模拟出中国东北地区地表温度南高北低的空间分布特征,但不同模式模拟结果之间差异较大,模拟能力较优模式能够较好的模拟出研究区域的冷暖中心,较优模式组和较差模式组在夏季的差距达到最大,较差模式组不能再现地表温度的分布特征。通过模式优选发现FGOALS_s2模式表现最优。总的来说,CMIP5耦合气候模式对中国东北区域地表温度的时空变化特征的模拟性能较好,对气候态年变化的模拟性能好于对年际变化的模拟。     

CMIP5模式对中国东北气候模拟能力的评估

利用CN05观测资料和参与IPCC第五次评估报告的45个全球气候系统模式的模拟结果,分析了新一代全球气候模式对中国东北三省(1961~2005年)气温和降水的模拟能力。结果表明:1)绝大多数模式都能较好地模拟出研究区内显著增温的趋势,对气温的年际变化模拟能力则相对有限;2)所有模式均能很好地再现气温气候态的空间分布特征,且多模式集合模拟结果优于绝大多数单个模式,空间相关系数达到了0.96;3)对于降水的模拟结果,模式间差异较大,多模式集合能较好地再现其空间分布规律(空间相关系数为0.86),对降水年际变化及线性变化趋势的模拟能力则较差。总体来说,多模式集合对东北气候的时空变化特征具有一定的模拟能力,且对气温模拟效果优于降水,对空间分布的模拟能力优于时间变化。     

不同区域气候模式对中国地区温度和降水的长期模拟比较

利用亚洲区域模式比较计划RMIP第二阶段五个区域模式和一个变网格全球模式，对中国地区1988年12月～1998年11月十年模拟的平均温度和降水结果，分析比较了不同区域气候模式对中国地区温度和降水的模拟能力。研究结果表明:几乎所有模式都能模拟出中国地区多年平均温度和降水的基本空间分布形态，但模式模拟的温度普遍偏低，在大部分区域，大多数模式模拟的降水偏多，而且不同模式之间存在较大差别。模式能较好地反映出中国地区温度的年际变化，对夏季降水的年际变化模拟较差，对冬季模拟较好。     

CMIP5气候模式对中国东部夏季降水年代际变化的模拟性能评估

使用分类集合的方法评估了第五次耦合模式比较计划(CMIP5)多个耦合模式对中国东部夏季降水年代际变化的模拟性能.结果表明,在评估的38个模式中,仅有6个模式(第1类模式)可以成功再现1970年代末中国东部夏季降水年代际变化的主要特征,即长江流域降水偏多、而华北和华南偏少.这些模式模拟的成功归因于它们能较好再现1970年代末东亚夏季风的年代际减弱及相关的环流场的变化,包括东亚沿海的偏北风异常以及西太平洋副热带高压的偏向西南、强度增强等.而对降水年代际变化模拟很差的第2类模式,则模拟出不出东亚夏季风的这种减弱特征.进一步的分析表明,两类CMIP5模式对太平洋年代际振荡(PDO)空间分布特征都有较好的再现能力,但对PDO年代际转变特征的模拟能力则差异较大.第1类模式能很好地模拟出1970年代末热带海洋的增暖和相关的PDO位相由负到正的转换,而第2类模式所模拟的PDO位相转变与观测完全相反,且也不能模拟出热带中东太平洋海洋的年代际增暖及江淮流域夏季的变冷,因此导致该类模式对1970年代末东亚夏季风的减弱和中国东部夏季雨型的年代际转变没有模拟能力.由此也表明,对耦合模式来说,中国夏季降水年代际变化的模拟能力在很大程度上取决于模式对海洋年代际变化信号的模拟.     

CMIP5多模式对阿留申低压气候特征的模拟检验与预估

利用观测的海温资料和海平面气压资料,检验了CMIP5(Coupled Model Intercomparison Project 5,CMIP5)多模式对阿留申低压(Aleutian Low,AL)特征指数的时空分布和变化的模拟能力;从AL周期及变化趋势等方面,分析了CMIP5模式预估的未来AL的变化特征。结果表明,CMIP5模式及其集合平均能够很好地模拟AL的环流结构,对AL的气候态有着较强的模拟能力,尤其是模式对于东太平洋海表温度的模拟能力直接影响其对于AL的模拟效果。模式的集合平均对变率强度的模拟偏强,且对于变率的模拟效果逊于对气候态的模拟。22个模式中的16个模式能模拟出AL强度指数的年代际变化周期,对年代际周期有着较好的刻画能力。Historical试验下对于AL的变化趋势存在着较大的不确定性,而相对于两种不同排放情景,随着排放的增加,AL更加偏北,强度增强,年际、年代际周期变得更加显著。在两种排放情景下模式的集合平均以及多数模式模拟出AL有着向北和增强的趋势。     

CMIP5模式对中国地区气温模拟能力评估与预估

利用第五次国际耦合模式比较计划（CMIP5）中29个气候模式的气温模拟结果,评估了各模式对中国地区年平均气温的模拟能力,对未来不同典型浓度路径（RCPs）下中国地区气温的可能变化给出了预估。结果表明：各模式能较好地模拟过去100多年中国地区增温趋势和年平均气温的空间分布,从模式间标准差来看,各模式对中国中部、南部气温模拟具有较高的一致性。利用相对均方根误差分析了各模式的模拟能力,对于多时间尺度（月、年）气温的气候平均态,有7个模式表现良好,高于中等水平,5个模式的模拟能力低于中等水平,模式集合平均值的模拟效果优于大多数单个模式。根据29个模式的评估结果,使用模拟性能相对较好的模式分析了未来不同排放情景下中国地区气温变化,21世纪前期,不同排放情景之间的预估结果差别较小,21世纪中期各情景之间的差别逐渐增大,到21世纪后期,3种排放情景的升温差别明显增大。     

Differences between CMIP6 and CMIP5 Models in Simulating Climate over China and the East Asian Monsoon

We compare the ability of coupled global climate models from the phases 5 and 6 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project(CMIP5 and CMIP6, respectively) in simulating the temperature and precipitation climatology and interannual variability over China for the period 1961–2005 and the climatological East Asian monsoon for the period1979–2005. All 92 models are able to simulate the geographical distribution of the above variables reasonably well.Compared with earlier CMIP5 models, current CMIP6 models have nationally weaker cold biases, a similar nationwide overestimation of precipitation and a weaker underestimation of the southeast–northwest precipitation gradient, a comparable overestimation of the spatial variability of the interannual variability, and a similar underestimation of the strength of winter monsoon over northern Asia. Pairwise comparison indicates that models have improved from CMIP5 to CMIP6 for climatological temperature and precipitation and winter monsoon but display little improvement for the interannual temperature and precipitation variability and summer monsoon. The ability of models relates to their horizontal resolutions in certain aspects. Both the multi-model arithmetic mean and median display similar skills and outperform most of the individual models in all considered aspects.     

Does CMIP6 Inspire More Confidence in Simulating Climate Extremes over China?

Based on climate extreme indices calculated from a high-resolution daily observational dataset in China during1961–2005, the performance of 12 climate models from phase 6 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project(CMIP6),and 30 models from phase 5 of CMIP(CMIP5), are assessed in terms of spatial distribution and interannual variability. The CMIP6 multi-model ensemble mean(CMIP6-MME) can simulate well the spatial pattern of annual mean temperature,maximum daily maximum temperature, and minimum daily minimum temperature. However, CMIP6-MME has difficulties in reproducing cold nights and warm days, and has large cold biases over the Tibetan Plateau. Its performance in simulating extreme precipitation indices is generally lower than in simulating temperature indices. Compared to CMIP5, CMIP6 models show improvements in the simulation of climate indices over China. This is particularly true for precipitation indices for both the climatological pattern and the interannual variation, except for the consecutive dry days. The arealmean bias for total precipitation has been reduced from 127%(CMIP5-MME) to 79%(CMIP6-MME). The most striking feature is that the dry biases in southern China, very persistent and general in CMIP5-MME, are largely reduced in CMIP6-MME. Stronger ascent together with more abundant moisture can explain this reduction in dry biases. Wet biases for total precipitation, heavy precipitation, and precipitation intensity in the eastern Tibetan Plateau are still present in CMIP6-MME, but smaller, compared to CMIP5-MME.     

CMIP5/AMIP GCM simulations of East Asian summer monsoon

The East Asian summer monsoon （EASM） is a distinctive component of the Asian climate system and critically influences the economy and society of the region.To understand the ability of AGCMs in capturing the major features of EASM,10 models that participated in Coupled Model Intercomparison Project/Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project （CMIP5/AMIP）,which used observational SST and sea ice to drive AGCMs during the period 1979-2008,were evaluated by comparing with observations and AMIP Ⅱ simulations.The results indicated that the multi-model ensemble （MME） of CMIP5/AMIP captures the main characteristics of precipitation and monsoon circulation,and shows the best skill in EASM simulation,better than the AMIP Ⅱ MME.As for the Meiyu/Changma/Baiyu rainbelt,the intensity of rainfall is underestimated in all the models.The biases are caused by a weak western Pacific subtropical high （WPSH） and accompanying eastward southwesterly winds in group Ⅰ models,and by a too strong and west-extended WPSH as well as westerly winds in group Ⅱ models.Considerable systematic errors exist in the simulated seasonal migration of rainfall,and the notable northward jumps and rainfall persistence remain a challenge for all the models.However,the CMIP5/AMIP MME is skillful in simulating the western North Pacific monsoon index （WNPMI）.     

The South Pacific Convergence Zone in CMIP5 simulations of historical and future climate

The South Pacific Convergence Zone (SPCZ) is evaluated in historical simulations from 26 Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) models, and compared with previous generation CMIP3 models. A subset of 24 CMIP5 models are able to simulate a distinct SPCZ in the December to February (DJF) austral summer, although the position of the SPCZ in these models is too zonal compared with observations. The spatial pattern of SPCZ precipitation is improved in CMIP5 models relative to CMIP3 models, although the spurious double ITCZ precipitation band in the eastern Pacific is intensified in many CMIP5 models. All CMIP5 models examined capture some interannual variability of SPCZ latitude, and 19 models simulate a realistic correlation with El Niño–Southern Oscillation. In simulations of the twenty-first century under the RCP8.5 emission scenario, no consistent shift in the mean position of the DJF SPCZ is identified. Several models simulate significant shifts northward, and a similar number of models simulate significant southward shifts. The majority of CMIP5 models simulate an increase in mean DJF SPCZ precipitation, and there is an intensification of the eastern Pacific double ITCZ precipitation band in many models. Most models simulate regions of increased precipitation in the western part of the SPCZ and near the equator, and regions of decreased precipitation at the eastern edge of the SPCZ. Decomposition of SPCZ precipitation changes into dynamic and thermodynamic components reveals predominantly increased precipitation due to thermodynamic changes, while dynamic changes lead to regions of both positive and negative precipitation anomalies.     

CMIP6全球气候模式对中国冬季寒潮频次模拟能力的评估北大核心CSCD

基于1961~2013年观测资料和第六次国际耦合模式比较计划(CMIP6)中32个气候模式的最低气温数据,评估了各模式及多模式集合平均方法对中国冬季寒潮频次的模拟能力,并筛选了中国不同区域的最优模式,为中国未来寒潮频次预估和气候模式改进提供理论支撑。结果表明,CMIP6全球气候模式可以很好地再现出中国冬季寒潮频次由北向南逐级递减的空间特征,EC-Earth3-Veg对中国寒潮频次模拟能力最好;绝大多数模式可以模拟出中国冬季寒潮频次下降的趋势,但对趋势变化幅度的模拟能力则相对有限。多模式等权重集合平均和多模式中位数集合平均较单一模式分别对中国北方地区和南方地区冬季寒潮频次空间格局的模拟效果改进显著,但是对趋势值的模拟普遍偏低。     

Uncertainty in land surface temperature simulation over China by CMIP3/CMIP5 models

In this paper, China-based observations are used to evaluate the performance of 24 CMIP3 (phase 3 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project) and 10 CMIP5 models in simulating land surface temperature (LST). It is found that all models can generally reproduce the climatology patterns of LST averaged during the period from 1960 to 1999. Further analyses of the regional features of LST show that the discrepancies between the observations and the simulations are smaller in Southwest and East China. Moreover, these models overestimate the temperatures in almost all areas, particularly in July. Although many models have large biases relative to the observations, the spread of the model results is large (i.e., >22 °C in Northwest and Northeast China). For the interannual variations, neither the individual models nor the multi-model mean has a remarkable positive correlation to the observations in the selected subregions. However, most models can capture geographic features during trend evaluations. A multi-model ensemble is believed to be an effective way to limit uncertainties, but the results suggest that its efficiency is restricted to simulating the LST trend. Examination of the surface energy budget indicated that the modeled discrepancies of net shortwave radiation and surface sensible heat flux may be responsible for the LST results, especially in July. It is concluded that the ability of current models in simulating LST over China is still a significant challenge. The spread of the models is large in simulating the climatology, interannual variation, and trend of LSTs. In general, the magnitudes of the spread may be as large as the magnitudes of the observations. Additionally, it is found that multi-model ensembles do not simulate LST with any more skill. Therefore, more work must focus on the limitations of the models' uncertainties in land surface research.