CMIP6多模式对欧亚大陆夏季降水的模拟能力评估
Evaluation of the Performance of CMIP6 Multi-Models in Simulating Summer Precipitation over Eurasia
DOI: 10.12677/ojns.2024.125096, PDF,   
作者: 姜 文:成都信息工程大学大气科学学院/高原大气与环境四川省重点实验室/成都平原城市气象与环境四川省野外科学观测研究站/四川省气象灾害预测预警工程实验室,四川 成都;定南县气象局,江西 赣州
关键词: CMIP6欧亚大陆夏季降水模式评估CMIP6 Eurasia Summer Precipitation Pattern Evaluation
摘要: 基于全球气候降水中心(GPCC)和参与第六次耦合模式比较计划(CMIP6)的六个模式的月平均降水数据,采用模式评估的相关方法:偏差、标准差、相关系数等,评估了六个模式对欧亚大陆1979~2014年夏季降水的模拟能力。结果表明EC-Earth3模式和IPSL-CM6A-LR模式的模拟能力较好,FGOALS-g3的模拟效果较差。各模式都能较好地模拟出欧亚大陆夏季降水的空间分布特征,除西亚和中亚地区偏差较小外,其他地区都存在一定的高估或低估。各模式夏季区域平均差值不大,其区域平均降水主要以年际变化为主,模式可以模拟出降水大致的年际变化特征,但各模式均整体低估了欧亚大陆夏季降水的强度。印度、青藏高原南麓、东南亚地区和中国东南沿海地区是降水变率大值区,各模式均有一定的高估和低估,其他地区各模式模拟的降水变率与GPCC数据的比较一致。各模式在亚洲季风区均方根误差均偏大,中亚和西亚普遍很小。各模式和GPCC数据的相关性整体都较差,只有部分地区相关性为正且通过显著性检验。
Abstract: Based on the monthly mean precipitation data from the Global Precipitation Center for Climate (GPCC) and six models that participated in the Sixth Coupled Model Intercomparison Program (CMIP6), the performance of the six models in simulating the summer precipitation over Eurasia from 1979 to 2014 is evaluated using the relevant methods of model evaluation: bias, standard deviation, and correlation coefficient. The results show that the EC-Earth3 and IPSL-CM6A-LR show a better performance, and the FGOALS-g3 shows a worse performance. All models can simulate the spatial distribution characteristics of summer precipitation over Eurasia better, with some overestimation or underestimation except for West and Central Asia, where the deviation is small. The regional average summer difference of each model is not large, and its regional average precipitation is mainly dominated by interannual variability, and the model can simulate the approximate interannual variability, but each model underestimates the intensity of summer precipitation over Eurasia as a whole. India, the southern foothills of the Tibetan Plateau, the Southeast Asian region, and the southeast coastal region of China are areas with large values of precipitation variability, and each model has some overestimation and underestimation, while the precipitation variability simulated by each model in the other regions is more consistent with the GPCC. The root-mean-square errors of the models are large in the Asian monsoon region and generally small in Central and West Asia. The correlations between the models and the GPCC are generally poor, with only some regions having significant correlations.
文章引用:姜文. CMIP6多模式对欧亚大陆夏季降水的模拟能力评估[J]. 自然科学, 2024, 12(5): 850-862. https://doi.org/10.12677/ojns.2024.125096

参考文献

[1] 黄荣辉, 蔡榕硕, 陈际龙, 等. 我国旱涝气候灾害的年代际变化及其与东亚气候系统变化的关系[J]. 大气科学, 2006, 30(5): 730-743.
[2] 周天军, 邹立维, 陈晓龙. 第六次国际耦合模式比较计划(CMIP6)评述[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2019, 15(5): 445-456.
[3] 唐彦丽, 俞永强, 李立娟, 等. FGOALS-g模式及其参与CMIP6的方案[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2019, 15(5): 551-557.
[4] 辛晓歌, 吴统文, 张洁, 等. BCC模式及其开展的CMIP6试验介绍[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2019, 15(5): 533-539.
[5] 孔祥慧, 王爱慧, 毕训强, 李星雨, 张贺. CAS-ESM模式对欧亚大陆逐日降水特征的数值模拟: 物理参数化方案和水平分辨率的影响[J]. 大气科学, 2021(4): 725-745.
[6] Bacmeister, J.T., Wehner, M.F., Neale, R.B., Gettelman, A., Hannay, C., Lauritzen, P.H., et al. (2014) Exploratory High-Resolution Climate Simulations Using the Community Atmosphere Model (CAM). Journal of Climate, 27, 3073-3099. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[7] Kong, X., Wang, A., Bi, X., Li, X. and Zhang, H. (2020) Effects of Horizontal Resolution on Hourly Precipitation in AGCM Simulations. Journal of Hydrometeorology, 21, 643-670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[8] Chen, C., Hsu, H. and Liang, H. (2021) Evaluation and Comparison of CMIP6 and CMIP5 Model Performance in Simulating the Seasonal Extreme Precipitation in the Western North Pacific and East Asia. Weather and Climate Extremes, 31, Article 100303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[9] Kim, Y., Min, S., Zhang, X., Sillmann, J. and Sandstad, M. (2020) Evaluation of the CMIP6 Multi-Model Ensemble for Climate Extreme Indices. Weather and Climate Extremes, 29, Article 100269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[10] Li, J., Miao, C., Wei, W., Zhang, G., Hua, L., Chen, Y., et al. (2021) Evaluation of CMIP6 Global Climate Models for Simulating Land Surface Energy and Water Fluxes during 1979-2014. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 13, e2021MS002515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[11] Long, M., Zhang, L., Hu, S. and Qian, S. (2021) Multi-Aspect Assessment of CMIP6 Models for Arctic Sea Ice Simulation. Journal of Climate, 34, 1515-1529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[12] Shen, Z., Duan, A., Li, D. and Li, J. (2021) Assessment and Ranking of Climate Models in Arctic Sea Ice Cover Simulation: From CMIP5 to Cmip6. Journal of Climate, 34, 3609-3627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[13] 杨明鑫, 肖天贵, 李勇, 胡桃. CMIP6模式对我国西南地区夏季气候变化的模拟和预估[J]. 高原气象, 2022(6): 1557-1571.
[14] Cui, T., Li, C. and Tian, F. (2021) Evaluation of Temperature and Precipitation Simulations in CMIP6 Models over the Tibetan Plateau. Earth and Space Science, 8, e2020EA001620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[15] Guo, H., Bao, A., Chen, T., Zheng, G., Wang, Y., Jiang, L., et al. (2021) Assessment of CMIP6 in Simulating Precipitation over Arid Central Asia. Atmospheric Research, 252, Article 105451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[16] Li, Z., Liu, T., Huang, Y., Peng, J. and Ling, Y. (2022) Evaluation of the CMIP6 Precipitation Simulations over Global Land. Earths Future, 10, e2021EF002500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[17] Vicente-Serrano, S.M., García-Herrera, R., Peña-Angulo, D., Tomas-Burguera, M., Domínguez-Castro, F., Noguera, I., et al. (2021) Do CMIP Models Capture Long-Term Observed Annual Precipitation Trends? Climate Dynamics, 58, 2825-2842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[18] Taylor, K.E. (2001) Summarizing Multiple Aspects of Model Performance in a Single Diagram. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 106, 7183-7192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[19] 于晓晶, 李淑娟, 赵勇, 等. CMIP5模式对未来30a新疆夏季降水的预估[J]. 沙漠与绿洲气象, 2017, 11(5): 53-62.
[20] Tian, J., Zhang, Z., Ahmed, Z., Zhang, L., Su, B., Tao, H., et al. (2021) Projections of Precipitation over China Based on CMIP6 Models. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, 35, 831-848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef