A Global Repository for Planet-Sized Experiments and Observations

Williams, D. N.; Balaji, V.; Cinquini, L.; Denvil, Sébastien; Duffy, Daniel Q.; Evans, Ben; Ferraro, R.; Hansen, Rose; Lautenschlager, Michael; Trenham, Claire

doi:10.1175/bams-d-15-00132.1

Cited by 39 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To meet this new interest and to address a wide variety of science questions from more and more scientific research communities, reflecting the expanding scope of comprehensive modelling in climate science, has put pressure on CMIP to become larger and more extensive. Consequently, there has been an explosion in the diversity and volume of requested CMIP output from an increasing number of experiments causing challenges for CMIP's technical infrastructure (Williams et al, 2015). Cultural and organizational challenges also arise from the tension between expectations that modelling centres deliver multiple model experiments to CMIP yet at the same time advance basic research in climate science.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) experimental design and organization

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. By coordinating the design and distribution of global climate model simulations of the past, current, and future climate, the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) has become one of the foundational elements of climate science. However, the need to address an everexpanding range of scientific questions arising from more and more research communities has made it necessary to revise the organization of CMIP. After a long and wide community consultation, a new and more federated structure has been put in place. It consists of three major elements: (1) a handful of common experiments, the DECK (Diagnostic, Evaluation and Characterization of Klima) and CMIP historical simulations (1850-near present) that will maintain continuity and help document basic characteristics of models across different phases of CMIP; (2) common standards, coordination, infrastructure, and documentation that will facilitate the distribution of model outputs and the characterization of the model ensemble; and (3) an ensemble of CMIPEndorsed Model Intercomparison Projects (MIPs) that will be specific to a particular phase of CMIP (now CMIP6) and that will build on the DECK and CMIP historical simulations to address a large range of specific questions and fill the scientific gaps of the previous CMIP phases. The DECK and CMIP historical simulations, together with the use of CMIP data standards, will be the entry cards for models participating in CMIP. Participation in CMIP6-Endorsed MIPs by individual modelling groups will be at their own discretion and will depend on their scientific interests and priorities. With

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) experimental design and organization

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Given the huge volumes of the ESGF data collections, it is realistic to assume that the requisite data will be maintained only at specific ESGF nodes where the evaluation tools will be executed. It is therefore realistic that within CMIP6 the evaluation tools will be installed and operated on selected ESGF supernodes only, currently expected to be those hosted by seven climate data centres on four continents (Beijing Normal University (China), Centre for Environmental Data Analysis (CEDA, UK), Deutsches Klimarechenzentrum (DKRZ, Germany), Institut Pierre Simon Laplace (IPSL, France), Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL, USA), National Com-putational Infrastructure (NCI, Australia), and the University of Tokyo (Japan); see Williams et al, 2015). These supernodes will need to provide the necessary storage and computing resources and be integrated into the ESGF replication infrastructure, which optimizes data transport between core ESGF sites.…”

Section: Integration Of Evaluation Tools In Esgf Infrastructurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…1 The scientific contents of the models and the details of the simulations are further described via the Earth System Documentation (ES-DOC) effort. 2 This has enabled a diverse community of scientists with more than 27 000 registered users (Williams et al, 2015) to readily search, retrieve, and analyse these simulations. Since CMIP5, there has also been a large effort to provide observations and reanalysis products to end users of CMIP results as part of the observations (obs4MIPs; Teixeira et al, 2014) and reanalysis (ana4MIPs) for model intercomparison projects.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Together, these efforts have the potential to facilitate comparisons of model simulations with observations and reanalyses. However, the full 1 http://esgf.llnl.gov/ 2 http://es-doc.org rewards of the coordinated experiments and data standards have yet to be realized to further capitalize on the CMIP multi-model and observational infrastructure already in place (Williams et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Towards improved and more routine Earth system model evaluation in CMIP

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) has successfully provided the climate community with a rich collection of simulation output from Earth system models (ESMs) that can be used to understand past climate changes and make projections and uncertainty estimates of the future. Confidence in ESMs can be gained because the models are based on physical principles and reproduce many important aspects of observed climate. More research is required to identify the processes that are most responsible for systematic biases and the magnitude and uncertainty of future projections so that more relevant performance tests can be developed. At the same time, there are many aspects of ESM evaluation that are well established and considered an essential part of systematic evaluation but have been implemented ad hoc with little community coordination. Given the diversity and complexity of ESM analysis, we argue that the CMIP community has reached a critical juncture at which many baseline aspects of model evaluation need to be performed much more efficiently and consistently. Here, we provide a perspective and viewpoint on how a more systematic, open, and rapid performance assessment of the large and diverse number of models that will participate in current and future phases of CMIP can be achieved, and announce our intention to implement such a system for CMIP6. Accomplishing this could also free up valuable resources as many scientists are frequently "re-inventing the wheel" by re-writing analysis routines for well-established analysis methods. A more systematic approach for the community would be to develop and apply evaluation tools that are based on the latest scientific knowledge and observational reference, are well suited for routine use, and provide a wide range of diagnostics and performance metrics that comprehensively characterize model behaviour as soon as the output is published to the Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF). The CMIP infrastructure enforces data standards and conventions for model output and documentation accessible via the ESGF, additionally publishing observations (obs4MIPs) and reanalyses (ana4MIPs) for modelPublished by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union. V. Eyring et al.: Towards improved and more routine Earth system model evaluation in CMIPintercomparison projects using the same data structure and organization as the ESM output. This largely facilitates routine evaluation of the ESMs, but to be able to process the data automatically alongside the ESGF, the infrastructure needs to be extended with processing capabilities at the ESGF data nodes where the evaluation tools can be executed on a routine basis. Efforts are already underway to develop community-based evaluation tools, and we encourage experts to provide additional diagnostic codes that would enhance this capability for CMIP. At the same time, we encourage the community to contribute observations and reanalyses for model evaluation to the obs4MIPs and ana4MIPs archives. The intention i...

show abstract

“…-The implementation is in the hands of the infrastructure developers, principally ESGF for the federated archive (Williams et al, 2015), but also related projects like Earth System Documentation (ES-DOC, Guilyardi et al, 2013). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Requirements for a global data infrastructure in support of CMIP6

Balaji¹,

Taylor²,

Juckes³

et al. 2018

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. This article presents the WIP recommendations for the global data infrastructure needed to support CMIP design, future growth and evolution. Developed in close coordination with those who build and run the existing infrastructure (the Earth System Grid Federation), the recommendations are based 5 on several principles beginning with the need to separate requirements, implementation, and operations. Other important principles include the consideration of data as a commodity in an ecosystem of users, the importance of provenance, the need for automation, and the obligation to measure costs and benefits. This paper concentrates on requirements, recognising the diversity of communities involved (modelers, analysts, software developers, and downstream users). Such requirements include the need for scientific reproducibility and accountability along-10 side the need to record and track data usage for the purpose of assigning credit. One key element is to generate a dataset-centric rather than system-centric focus, with an aim to making the infrastructure less prone to systemic failure.With these overarching principles and requirements, the WIP has produced a set of position papers, which are summarized here. They provide specifications for managing and delivering model output, including strategies for replication and versioning, licensing, data quality assurance, citation, long-term archival, and dataset tracking. They also describe a new and more 15 formal approach for specifying what data, and associated metadata, should be saved, which enables future data volumes to be estimated.

show abstract

A Global Repository for Planet-Sized Experiments and Observations

Cited by 39 publications

References 8 publications

Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) experimental design and organization

Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) experimental design and organization

Towards improved and more routine Earth system model evaluation in CMIP

Requirements for a global data infrastructure in support of CMIP6

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About