.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
Return
Process-Oriented Diagnostics Principles, Practice, Community Development, and Common Standards
.png){kind=icon}
OA
AI
DOI：10.1175/BAMS-D-21-0268.1.png)
.png){kind=icon}
Original request for help.png){kind=icon}
Share.png){kind=icon}
Save
Abstract
En 中文
Process-oriented diagnostics (PODs) aim to provide feedback for model developers through model analysis based on physical hypotheses. However, the step from a diagnostic based on relationships among variables, even when hypothesis driven, to specific guidance for revising model formulation or parameterizations can be substantial. The POD may provide more informa-tion than a purely performance-based metric, but a gap between POD principles and providing actionable information for specific model revisions can remain. Furthermore, in coordinating diagnostics development, there is a trade-off between freedom for the developer, aiming to capture innovation, and near-term utility to the modeling center. Best practices that allow for the former, while conforming to specifications that aid the latter, are important for community diagnostics development that leads to tangible model improvements. Promising directions to close the gap between principles and practice include the interaction of PODs with perturbed physics experiments and with more quantitative process models as well as the inclusion of personnel from modeling centers in diagnostics development groups for immediate feedback during climate model revisions. Examples are provided, along with best-practice recommendations, based on practical experience from the NOAA Model Diagnostics Task Force (MDTF). Common standards for metrics and diagnostics that have arisen from a collaboration between the MDTF and the Department of Energy's Coordinated Model Evaluation Capability are advocated as a means of uniting community diagnostics efforts.
Keywords:
Atmosphere-ocean interaction
Clouds
Hurricanes/ typhoons
Hydrologic cycle
Model evaluation/ performance
Interannual variability
Journal
IF:
5.9
Papers:
3.7K
Citations:
2.7W
Organization
View more organizations