Search

Earth system models are increasing in complexity and incorporating more processes than their predecessors, making them important tools for studying the global carbon cycle. However, their coupled behaviour has only recently been examined in any detail, and has yielded a very wide range of outcomes, with coupled climate-carbon cycle models that represent land-use change simulating total land carbon stores by 2100 that vary by as much as 600 PgC given the same emissions scenario. This large uncertainty is associated with differences in how key processes are simulated in different models, and illustrates the necessity of determining which models are most realistic using rigorous model evaluation methodologies. Here we assess the state-of-the-art with respect to evaluation of Earth system models, with a particular emphasis on the simulation of the carbon cycle and associated biospheric processes. We examine some of the new advances and remaining uncertainties relating to (i) modern and palaeo data and (ii) metrics for evaluation, and discuss a range of strategies, such as the inclusion of pre-calibration, combined process- and system-level evaluation, and the use of emergent constraints, that can contribute towards the development of more robust evaluation schemes. An increasingly data-rich environment offers more opportunities for model evaluation, but it is also a challenge, as more knowledge about data uncertainties is required in order to determine robust evaluation methodologies that move the field of ESM evaluation from "beauty contest" toward the development of useful constraints on model behaviour. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Land models, which have been developed by the modeling community in the past two decades to predict future states of ecosystems and climate, have to be critically evaluated for their performance skills of simulating ecosystem responses and feedback to climate change. Benchmarking is an emerging procedure to measure and evaluate performance of models against a set of defined standards. This paper proposes a benchmarking framework for evaluation of land models. The framework includes (1) targeted aspects of model performance to be evaluated; (2) a set of benchmarks as defined references to test model performance; (3) metrics to measure and compare performance skills among models so as to identify model strengths and deficiencies; and (4) model improvement. Component 4 may or may not be involved in a benchmark analysis but is an ultimate goal of general modeling research. Land models are required to simulate exchange of water, energy, carbon and sometimes other trace gases between the atmosphere and the land-surface, and should be evaluated for their simulations of biophysical processes, biogeochemical cycles, and vegetation dynamics across timescales in response to both weather and climate change. Benchmarks that are used to evaluate models generally consist of direct observations, data-model products, and data-derived patterns and relationships. Metrics of measuring mismatches between models and benchmarks may include (1) a priori thresholds of acceptable model performance and (2) a scoring system to combine data-model mismatches for various processes at different temporal and spatial scales. The benchmark analyses should identify clues of weak model performance for future improvement. Iterations between model evaluation and improvement via benchmarking shall demonstrate progress of land modeling and help establish confidence in land models for their predictions of future states of ecosystems and climate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]