Paths to accuracy for radiation parameterizations in atmospheric models

Radiative transfer is sufficiently well understood that its parameterization in atmospheric models is primarily an effort to balance computational cost and accuracy. The most common approach is to compute radiative transfer with the highest practical spectral accuracy but infrequently in time and/or...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Robert Pincus, Bjorn Stevens
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: American Geophysical Union (AGU) 2013-06-01
Series:Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1002/jame.20027
_version_ 1818650152016019456
author Robert Pincus
Bjorn Stevens
author_facet Robert Pincus
Bjorn Stevens
author_sort Robert Pincus
collection DOAJ
description Radiative transfer is sufficiently well understood that its parameterization in atmospheric models is primarily an effort to balance computational cost and accuracy. The most common approach is to compute radiative transfer with the highest practical spectral accuracy but infrequently in time and/or space, though errors introduced by this approximation are difficult to quantify. An alternative is to perform spectrally sparse calculations frequently in time using randomly chosen spectral quadrature points. Here we show that purely random quadrature points, though effective in some large‐eddy simulations, are not a good choice for models in which the land surface responds to radiative fluxes because surface temperature perturbations can be large enough, and persistent long enough, to affect model evolution. These errors may be mitigated by choosing teams of spectral points designed to limit the maximum surface flux error; teams, rather than individual quadrature points, are then chosen randomly. The approach is implemented in the ECHAM6 global model and the results are examined using “perfect‐model” experiments on time scales ranging from a day to a month. In this application the approach introduces errors commensurate with the infrequent calculation of broadband calculations for the same computational cost. But because teams need not increase with size, and indeed may become better and more balanced with increased spectral density, improvements in radiative transfer may not need to be traded off against spatiotemporal sampling.
first_indexed 2024-12-17T01:45:40Z
format Article
id doaj.art-ef0c5cae45764b56b7c7b4acb3d665af
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1942-2466
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-17T01:45:40Z
publishDate 2013-06-01
publisher American Geophysical Union (AGU)
record_format Article
series Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems
spelling doaj.art-ef0c5cae45764b56b7c7b4acb3d665af2022-12-21T22:08:12ZengAmerican Geophysical Union (AGU)Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems1942-24662013-06-015222523310.1002/jame.20027Paths to accuracy for radiation parameterizations in atmospheric modelsRobert Pincus0Bjorn Stevens1University of Colorado and NOAA Earth System Research Lab, Physical Sciences DivisionUniversity of ColoradoBoulder Colorado USAMax Planck Institute for MeteorologyHamburg GermanyRadiative transfer is sufficiently well understood that its parameterization in atmospheric models is primarily an effort to balance computational cost and accuracy. The most common approach is to compute radiative transfer with the highest practical spectral accuracy but infrequently in time and/or space, though errors introduced by this approximation are difficult to quantify. An alternative is to perform spectrally sparse calculations frequently in time using randomly chosen spectral quadrature points. Here we show that purely random quadrature points, though effective in some large‐eddy simulations, are not a good choice for models in which the land surface responds to radiative fluxes because surface temperature perturbations can be large enough, and persistent long enough, to affect model evolution. These errors may be mitigated by choosing teams of spectral points designed to limit the maximum surface flux error; teams, rather than individual quadrature points, are then chosen randomly. The approach is implemented in the ECHAM6 global model and the results are examined using “perfect‐model” experiments on time scales ranging from a day to a month. In this application the approach introduces errors commensurate with the infrequent calculation of broadband calculations for the same computational cost. But because teams need not increase with size, and indeed may become better and more balanced with increased spectral density, improvements in radiative transfer may not need to be traded off against spatiotemporal sampling.https://doi.org/10.1002/jame.20027parameterizationMonte Carloradiation
spellingShingle Robert Pincus
Bjorn Stevens
Paths to accuracy for radiation parameterizations in atmospheric models
Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems
parameterization
Monte Carlo
radiation
title Paths to accuracy for radiation parameterizations in atmospheric models
title_full Paths to accuracy for radiation parameterizations in atmospheric models
title_fullStr Paths to accuracy for radiation parameterizations in atmospheric models
title_full_unstemmed Paths to accuracy for radiation parameterizations in atmospheric models
title_short Paths to accuracy for radiation parameterizations in atmospheric models
title_sort paths to accuracy for radiation parameterizations in atmospheric models
topic parameterization
Monte Carlo
radiation
url https://doi.org/10.1002/jame.20027
work_keys_str_mv AT robertpincus pathstoaccuracyforradiationparameterizationsinatmosphericmodels
AT bjornstevens pathstoaccuracyforradiationparameterizationsinatmosphericmodels