Practice and philosophy of climate model tuning across six U.S. modeling centers.

Model calibration (or "tuning") is a necessary part of developing and testing coupled ocean-atmosphere climate models regardless of their main scientific purpose. There is an increasing recognition that this process needs to become more transparent for both users of climate model output and other developers. Knowing how and why climate models are tuned and which targets are used is essential to avoiding possible misattributions of skillful predictions to data accommodation and vice versa. This paper describes the approach and practice of model tuning for the six major U.S. climate modeling centers. While details differ among groups in terms of scientific missions, tuning targets and tunable parameters, there is a core commonality of approaches. However, practices differ significantly on some key aspects, in particular, in the use of initialized forecast analyses as a tool, the explicit use of the historical transient record, and the use of the present day radiative imbalance vs. the implied balance in the pre-industrial as a target.

Observational constraints on glyoxal production from isoprene oxidation and its contribution to organic aerosol over the Southeast United States.

We use a 0-D photochemical box model and a 3-D global chemistry-climate model, combined with observations from the NOAA Southeast Nexus (SENEX) aircraft campaign, to understand the sources and sinks of glyoxal over the Southeast United States. Box model simulations suggest a large difference in glyoxal production among three isoprene oxidation mechanisms (AM3ST, AM3B, and MCM v3.3.1). These mechanisms are then implemented into a 3-D global chemistry-climate model. Comparison with field observations shows that the average vertical profile of glyoxal is best reproduced by AM3ST with an effective reactive uptake coefficient γglyx of 2 × 10-3, and AM3B without heterogeneous loss of glyoxal. The two mechanisms lead to 0-0.8 µg m-3 secondary organic aerosol (SOA) from glyoxal in the boundary layer of the Southeast U.S. in summer. We consider this to be the lower limit for the contribution of glyoxal to SOA, as other sources of glyoxal other than isoprene are not included in our model. In addition, we find that AM3B shows better agreement on both formaldehyde and the correlation between glyoxal and formaldehyde (RGF = [GLYX]/[HCHO]), resulting from the suppression of δ-isoprene peroxy radicals (δ-ISOPO2). We also find that MCM v3.3.1 may underestimate glyoxal production from isoprene oxidation, in part due to an underestimated yield from the reaction of IEPOX peroxy radicals (IEPOXOO) with HO2. Our work highlights that the gas-phase production of glyoxal represents a large uncertainty in quantifying its contribution to SOA.