Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Coupled Model Intercomparison Project

The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) is a standardized framework for coordinating and comparing simulations from global coupled ocean-atmosphere climate models, organized under the World Climate Research Programme's (WCRP) Working Group on Coupled Modelling (WGCM). Initiated in the early 1990s as the coupled analog to the Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project (AMIP), CMIP facilitates multi-model ensembles to evaluate climate variability, model performance against observations, and projections of future changes driven by factors such as greenhouse gas emissions. Through successive phases—CMIP1 to CMIP6, with CMIP7 planning underway—the project has produced vast datasets that underpin assessments by the (IPCC), enabling systematic identification of model strengths and persistent systematic biases, such as in sea surface temperatures and precipitation patterns. Key achievements include the standardization of diagnostic experiments and scenario-based projections, like those using in CMIP6, which have advanced understanding of and inter-model spread despite challenges in fully resolving observed trends.

Background

Definition and Objectives

The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) is an international collaborative framework for coordinating and standardizing simulations from global coupled atmosphere-ocean general circulation models, and later Earth system models, to evaluate climate variability and projections. Initiated in 1995 by the Working Group on Coupled Modelling (WGCM) under the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP), CMIP serves as the analog to the Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project (AMIP) but extends to fully coupled ocean-atmosphere systems, enabling assessments of interactions across 's climate components including land, sea ice, and biogeochemical cycles. The core objective of CMIP is to enhance understanding of past, present, and future changes driven by natural variability or forcings through multi-model intercomparisons, which reveal robust patterns amid model uncertainties. By defining common experimental protocols—such as control runs, idealized forcing scenarios (e.g., abrupt quadrupling of atmospheric CO₂), and historical simulations—CMIP facilitates direct comparisons of outputs from dozens of modeling groups, typically over 50 centers by recent phases, to quantify means, spread, and discrepancies attributable to parameterization differences or variations. This approach supports model evaluation against observations, identification of systematic biases (e.g., in tropical or feedbacks), and iterative improvements in model physics and . Additionally, CMIP aims to generate standardized, open-access datasets for broader scientific analysis, policy assessments, and IPCC reports, addressing questions on , regional impacts, and forcing-response relationships while highlighting limitations from model simplifications or incomplete process representations. The Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison (PCMDI) at provides infrastructural support, including data archiving and analysis tools, to WGCM in scoping experiments and disseminating results.

Organizational Framework

The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) operates as a coordinated international effort under the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP), specifically within its Earth System Modelling and Observations (ESMO) core project. It is overseen by the CMIP Panel, which guides the project's experimental design, endorses subsidiary Model Intercomparison Projects (MIPs), and coordinates participation from global modeling groups. The Working Group on Coupled Modelling (WGCM), a WCRP panel established to advance coupled climate models, provides strategic direction and reviews model developments to support CMIP's objectives. Technical infrastructure is managed by the WCRP ESMO Infrastructure Panel (WIP), which standardizes data protocols, facilitates archiving through the (ESGF), and ensures accessibility of simulation outputs exceeding 14 petabytes in recent phases. Over 50 modeling centers have contributed to phases like , submitting simulations according to defined protocols for core diagnostics, historical runs, and scenario experiments. This structure evolved to address growing complexity, with task teams now aiding CMIP7 design and emphasizing streamlined coordination for timely data delivery expected in early 2026.

Historical Phases

Early Phases (CMIP1 and CMIP2)

The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) was established in 1995 by the Working Group on Coupled Modelling (WGCM) under the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP) to standardize and compare simulations from global coupled ocean-atmosphere general circulation models (GCMs). CMIP1, initiated in 1996, focused on control experiments where external forcings such as CO2 concentrations and were held constant at pre-industrial levels to assess models' ability to simulate mean without transient changes. These runs, analogous to the earlier Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project (AMIP) but extended to fully coupled systems, involved 15 participating models and emphasized evaluation of equilibrium climate states, including systematic biases in sea surface temperatures and flux adjustments used by many models to mitigate drift. CMIP2, announced on January 7, 1997, expanded the framework to include transient forcing experiments, specifically a 1% per year compound increase in atmospheric CO2 concentrations over 80 years, reaching doubling around year 70. This phase aimed to intercompare models' , the time-evolving response to , and the influence of flux adjustments on sensitivity estimates, with optional paired control runs and equilibrium 2xCO2 mixed-layer experiments for context. Seventeen to 18 models contributed data, representing groups from (2), (1), France (2), (3), (2), the (1), and the (7), with approximately half employing flux corrections. Outputs included expanded diagnostic fields beyond CMIP1, enabling analyses of inter-model spread in surface temperature, , and heat uptake. Results from both phases informed the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's Third Assessment Report (2001), particularly in evaluating model performance for present-day climate and projecting transient responses to increases, highlighting persistent challenges like excessive ocean drift in non-flux-adjusted models and variability in equilibrium sensitivity estimates ranging from 1.5°C to over 6°C. These early efforts laid the groundwork for standardized protocols but revealed limitations in data volume and experiment design, prompting subsequent phases to incorporate historical simulations and ensemble approaches.

CMIP Phase 3

The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 3 (CMIP3) represented a significant expansion in coordinated climate modeling efforts, building on earlier phases by emphasizing multi-model ensembles for evaluating 20th- and 21st-century climate simulations. Initiated under the World Climate Research Programme's Working Group on Coupled Modelling (WCRP WGCM), CMIP3 focused on archiving output from coupled ocean-atmosphere general circulation models (GCMs) to support research into the physical climate system, including atmosphere, land, ocean, and sea ice components. Data collection commenced in 2004, with primary submissions occurring between 2005 and 2006, enabling standardized comparisons of model performance against observations and projections of future climate change. This phase marked the first large-scale effort to produce a comprehensive, openly accessible multimodel dataset tailored for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), published in 2007. Seventeen modeling groups from twelve countries contributed simulations from 24 distinct models to the CMIP3 archive, hosted by the Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison (PCMDI) at . These contributions included equilibrium estimates, transient simulations, and variability analyses, allowing for robust assessment of intermodel spread in key metrics such as global temperature response to . The dataset's scale—exceeding 30 terabytes by early 2005 and growing to over 36 terabytes by 2009—facilitated peer-reviewed analyses by thousands of researchers, with more than 250 journal publications emerging from its use by July 2009. CMIP3 defined twelve core experiments to standardize model forcings and outputs, including the 20th-century simulation (20c3m) incorporating and natural forcings such as gases, aerosols, solar variability, and volcanic activity from 1870 to 2000. Future-oriented runs encompassed (SRES) projections under pathways A1B, A2, and B1, extending to 2100, alongside commitment experiments to isolate thermal inertia effects post-forcing stabilization. Control simulations provided baselines without external forcings, enabling detection of internal variability. These protocols ensured consistency in variables like surface temperature, , and sea-level pressure, with outputs adhering to IPCC-standard requirements for monthly and daily means. The PCMDI archive made CMIP3 data freely available for non-commercial research via the Earth System Grid (ESG) portal, FTP, and OPeNDAP protocols, amassing over 536 terabytes of downloads from more than 2,500 registered users by 2009. This infrastructure underpinned AR4's Working Group I assessments, where multimodel means informed projections of warming ranges (e.g., 1.8–4.0°C by 2100 under various SRES scenarios) and regional patterns, while highlighting uncertainties in cloud feedbacks and ocean heat uptake. Despite advances, later evaluations noted CMIP3 models' tendencies to overestimate tropical precipitation and underestimate Arctic sea ice decline compared to observations, informing refinements in subsequent phases.

CMIP Phase 5

CMIP5, the fifth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project, was endorsed by the World Climate Research Programme's Working Group on Coupled Modelling in September 2008 and provided a coordinated framework for simulations underpinning the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's Fifth Assessment Report (AR5), published in 2013. It engaged 20 international modeling groups, yielding outputs from coupled atmosphere-ocean general circulation models and Earth system models to evaluate mechanisms driving model divergences, particularly in and feedbacks, and to probe decadal-scale predictability. First model outputs became available in February 2011, aligning with AR5 deadlines including a July 2012 paper submission cutoff and a March 2013 publication deadline for citations. The protocol outlined 35 experiments, encompassing core diagnostics for baseline model behavior, historical runs from 1850 to at least 2012 incorporating observed concentrations, aerosols, solar variability, and volcanic forcings, and idealized tests such as abrupt quadrupling of atmospheric CO2 (abrupt4xCO2) for equilibrium and 1% annual CO2 increase (1pctCO2) for transient responses. Future projections utilized four Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs), quantifying radiative forcings in 2100 relative to pre-industrial levels: RCP2.6 (~2.6 W/m², stringent ), RCP4.5 (~4.5 W/m², stabilization post-2100), RCP6.0 (~6.0 W/m², higher stabilization), and RCP8.5 (~8.5 W/m², rising emissions without policy intervention). Decadal experiments, initialized from observed and atmosphere states around 1960–2012, extended short-term forecasts to assess near-term variability. These simulations supported AR5's analyses of 20th-century climate fidelity against observations, attribution of warming to forcings, and projections of global temperature increases (e.g., likely 1.0–3.7°C by 2100 under RCP2.6–8.5 across models), regional patterns, and extremes, while revealing persistent intermodel spreads in (typically 2–4.5°C) due to unresolved cloud-aerosol interactions. Enhanced metadata standards via the METAFOR initiative improved data interoperability, with archives hosted on the Earth System Grid Federation for global access, though model resolutions varied (e.g., horizontal grids from ~1° to 3°), limiting uniformity in process representation.

CMIP Phase 6

The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) represents an expansion in scope and complexity over prior phases, with experimental design formalized in 2016 to support coordinated simulations across global modeling centers. Coordinated by the World Climate Research Programme's Working Group on Coupled Modelling (WGCM) and hosted by the Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison (PCMDI), CMIP6 emphasized a federated structure including core Diagnostic Experiments (DECK)—such as pre-industrial control (piControl) and Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project (AMIP) runs—alongside historical simulations spanning 1850 to the near-present using observed forcings. This phase incorporated 23 endorsed Model Intercomparison Projects (MIPs), addressing specialized topics like aerosol-cloud interactions (AERMIP), high-resolution modeling (HighResMIP), and polar amplification (Polar MIP). CMIP6 targeted four key science questions: the origins and consequences of systematic model biases; assessment of future climate changes amid variability, predictability, and forcing uncertainties; process-level understanding for model improvement; and regional-scale climate responses. Unlike CMIP5's reliance on Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs), CMIP6's Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) integrated (SSPs) with levels (e.g., SSP1-2.6, SSP5-8.5), enabling exploration of coupled human- system dynamics and a broader range of plausible futures. Simulations encouraged higher spatial resolutions (e.g., ~100 km for atmosphere/) and greater use of Earth system models (ESMs) incorporating biogeochemical cycles. Over 49 modeling groups contributed from 132 registered models, producing outputs from 322 experiments archived via the Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF), totaling approximately 24.5 petabytes across 6.4 million datasets. Data production occurred primarily between 2015 and 2021, with CMIP6 serving as the foundational dataset for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's Sixth Assessment Report (AR6), published in 2021-2022. Notable advancements included refined representations of clouds, aerosols, and ocean dynamics, though inter-model spread in increased compared to CMIP5, with some models exceeding 5°C for doubled CO2.

CMIP Phase 7

CMIP Phase 7 (CMIP7), coordinated by the (WCRP), is the forthcoming iteration of the , emphasizing a continuous, evolving framework to support ongoing climate assessments and research. As of October 2025, it remains in early organizational stages, with planning initiated following the completion of CMIP6 data releases, building on lessons from prior phases to enhance model coordination and data accessibility. The phase introduces a "Fast Track" subset of experiments, including the Assessment Fast Track, designed to deliver targeted simulations for timely policy-relevant outputs, such as those informing the (AR7). CMIP7 is motivated by four fundamental research questions: (1) patterns of sea surface change, (2) changing weather patterns, (3) the water-carbon- nexus, and (4) risks of tipping points. To address these, the phase expands the Core Diagnostic Experiments () to include updated baselines such as historical simulations, system model historical runs (esm-hist), pre-industrial controls (piClim-control), anthropogenic forcing experiments (piClim-anthro), and abrupt 4xCO2 forcing (piClim-4xCO2), endorsed by the on Coupled Modelling (WGCM) in March 2024. Key advances feature a shift toward CO2-emissions-driven experiments (e.g., flat10 scenarios maintaining constant emissions), new scenario sets encompassing low, medium, and high emissions pathways, and sustained endorsement of 35 community-led Model Intercomparison Projects (MIPs). Forcing datasets have been updated to cover at least through 2021, with prototype versions available by late 2024 to facilitate model runs. The CMIP7 Data Request is under development via the Harmonised Thematic Variables process, managed by a dedicated task team, to standardize output variables across experiments. Initial model output are anticipated starting in late , aligning with an ambitious timeline that accounts for modeling center capacities and uncertainties in AR7 scheduling. Enhanced protocols, including the Essential Model Documentation standard, aim to improve and , while the CMIP International Project Office provides ongoing support for infrastructure and . This structure prioritizes periodic releases over a single large archive, enabling iterative refinements based on emerging scientific needs.

Methodology and Experiments

Core Diagnostic Experiments (DECK)

The Core Diagnostic Experiments (), an acronym for Diagnostic, Evaluation and Characterization of Klima, form the foundational set of simulations required for all models participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP). These experiments establish a standardized baseline to characterize each model's , internal variability, and response to , enabling direct inter-model comparisons independent of specific scenario assumptions. Introduced in CMIP5 and retained in subsequent phases including CMIP6, the ensures continuity across phases by mandating a minimal set of idealized and control runs that document basic model behavior before more complex simulations. This core requirement facilitates evaluation of model fidelity against observations and paleoclimate proxies, while isolating equilibrium and transient climate sensitivities. The comprises four principal experiments: the pre-industrial control (piControl), abrupt quadrupling of atmospheric CO2 concentration (abrupt-4xCO2), 1% per year compounded increase in CO2 (1pctCO2), and the Atmosphere Model Intercomparison Project (AMIP) simulation. Each is designed with precise protocols for initial conditions, forcings, and integration lengths to minimize variability in setup across modeling groups. For instance, piControl and the CO2 perturbation experiments branch from a stable pre-industrial state, using fixed radiative forcings representative of 1850 conditions, including constant greenhouse gases, aerosols, , and . These simulations typically span centuries to capture long-term drifts and variability, with piControl requiring at least 500 years to adequately sample unforced internal climate modes such as El Niño-Southern Oscillation or decadal oscillations. The piControl experiment maintains constant pre-industrial forcings to simulate the unperturbed system, serving as a reference for detecting forced signals in other runs and quantifying internal variability that can mask trends. It allows assessment of model drift from initial conditions and provides a for comparison with historical simulations. The abrupt-4xCO2 experiment, initialized from year 1 of piControl, instantaneously quadruples CO2 concentration and holds it fixed thereafter, typically for 150 years or longer; this isolates the equilibrium response to a step forcing, enabling estimation of (ECS) through methods like regression on global mean surface temperature. Similarly, the 1pctCO2 experiment increases CO2 by 1% annually from pre-industrial levels for 140 years (reaching 4xCO2), followed by stabilization or extension; it quantifies transient climate response (TCR), the warming at the time of CO2 doubling under gradual forcing, which is crucial for projecting near-term changes. The AMIP experiment decouples the atmosphere-ocean by prescribing observed sea surface temperatures (SSTs), , and continental conditions from 1870 or 1979 to present (e.g., 1979–2014 in CMIP6), with evolving historical forcings; this validates the atmospheric component's realism against reanalyses and observations, identifying biases in , clouds, or dynamics before full . Collectively, DECK outputs support diagnostics like effective , analysis, and energy budget closure, with data standardized via the Earth System Grid Federation for . While these experiments prioritize idealized perturbations over real-world complexity, they underpin CMIP's value by providing robust, reproducible benchmarks for model improvement and uncertainty quantification in .

Historical and Scenario Simulations

The historical simulations within the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) require participating climate models to integrate from pre-industrial conditions, typically starting in 1850, through to the recent past using time-varying observed forcings. These forcings encompass concentrations, short-lived climate forcers like aerosols and tropospheric ozone, natural variability from and volcanic eruptions, and changes derived from historical datasets. In CMIP6, the standard historical period spans 1850–2014, enabling direct evaluation of model outputs against instrumental records for metrics such as global mean surface temperature, , and regional patterns. Earlier phases, such as CMIP5, extended historical runs to 2005 or 2014 with similar forcings, while CMIP3 focused on 1871–2000 to align with available observations. These simulations form the "entry card" for model participation, quantifying reproducibility of 20th-century warming—estimated at 0.6–1.0°C globally—and identifying biases in phenomena like the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation. Historical runs connect directly to the Core Diagnostic Experiments () by initializing from control simulations (e.g., pre-industrial 1850 conditions) and provide baselines for attributing observed changes to specific forcings. For instance, models driven by all forcings versus natural-only forcings demonstrate that anthropogenic influences dominate post-1950 temperature trends, with multi-model ensembles showing a forced response of approximately 0.7°C from 1850–2014. Data from these simulations, archived via the Earth System Grid Federation, support analyses of internal variability versus forced signals, though inter-model spread in aerosol effects can exceed 0.5°C in regional means. Scenario simulations extend historical integrations into the future (e.g., 2015–2100 or beyond) under prescribed radiative forcing pathways to explore potential climate outcomes. In CMIP5, the Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) defined four trajectories—RCP2.6 (peak forcing ~3 W/m² stabilizing near 2.6 W/m² by 2100), RCP4.5, RCP6.0, and RCP8.5 (increasing to ~8.5 W/m²)—focusing on end-of-century forcings without explicit socio-economic narratives. CMIP6's Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) refines this by integrating Shared Socio-economic Pathways (SSPs) with forcing levels, yielding scenarios like SSP1-1.9 (low emissions, net-zero by 2050), SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5 (middle-of-the-road), SSP3-7.0 (regional rivalry, high emissions), and SSP5-8.5 (fossil-fueled development). These drive multi-model projections for impacts assessment, with ensembles revealing equilibrium climate sensitivity influencing warming ranges (e.g., 1.5–4.5°C across models under SSP2-4.5). ScenarioMIP emphasizes tiered experiments: for core long-term projections (e.g., 2015–2100), Tier 2 for variability-focused runs, and Tier 3 for low-likelihood, high-impact cases like abrupt reductions. This structure allows quantification of uncertainty from emissions, , and biogeochemical feedbacks, with historical-to-scenario transitions ensuring continuity in heat uptake and states. For CMIP7 planning as of 2024, scenarios may incorporate updated SSPs with extended timelines to 2300 for long-term commitments. Outputs inform probabilistic projections, though model spread in transient climate response (e.g., 1.2–2.5°C per CO2 doubling) underscores ongoing challenges in constraining future loss or extreme event frequencies.

Endorsed Model Intercomparison Projects (MIPs)

The Endorsed Model Intercomparison Projects () extend the core CMIP framework by coordinating specialized simulations and diagnostics to probe targeted processes, feedbacks, and forcings not comprehensively addressed in the Diagnostic Experiments () or historical runs. These projects underwent a formal endorsement process by the World Climate Research Programme's (WCRP) Working Group on Coupled Modelling (WGCM) and CMIP Panel, requiring proposals to align with CMIP's overarching science questions—such as radiative forcings, variability, and future projections—while demonstrating links to DECK baselines, resource feasibility, and multi-model participation (typically at least 10 groups committing to priority experiments). Endorsement ensures standardized protocols for experiment design, variable output, and analysis, enabling robust intercomparisons that reveal model strengths, biases, and uncertainties. In CMIP6, launched in 2016, 21 MIPs received endorsement between 2014 and mid-2015, comprising 17 simulation-based MIPs and 4 diagnostic MIPs that primarily specify additional output requests from existing simulations rather than new integrations. These MIPs collectively generated petabytes of data, supporting assessments like the Intergovernmental Panel on Change's Sixth Assessment Report by quantifying uncertainties in areas such as effects on clouds, land-use impacts on , and uptake . Participation varied, with popular MIPs like ScenarioMIP involving over 30 models, while niche ones like SolarMIP drew fewer but focused contributions. Prominent CMIP6-endorsed MIPs include:
AcronymFull NamePrimary Focus
AerChemMIPAerosols and Chemistry Model Intercomparison ProjectInteractive , aerosol-radiation and aerosol-cloud interactions, and their forcing.
C4MIPCoupled Climate–Carbon Cycle Model Intercomparison ProjectTerrestrial and feedbacks to CO₂ and .
DAMIPDetection and Attribution Model Intercomparison ProjectSingle-forcing experiments to attribute historical and future changes to specific drivers like greenhouse gases or .
DCPPDecadal Climate ProjectInitialized predictions on seasonal-to-decadal timescales, evaluating predictability from internal variability and external forcings.
GeoMIP Model Intercomparison ProjectSolar radiation management simulations to assess engineered interventions.
HighResMIPHigh Resolution Model Intercomparison ProjectEffects of increased horizontal resolution (≤50 km atmosphere, ≤10 km ) on mean and variability.
ISMIP6Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison Project for CMIP6 and contributions to sea-level rise under forcing scenarios.
LUMIPLand-Use Model Intercomparison ProjectBiogeophysical and biogeochemical impacts of land-use and land-cover changes.
ScenarioMIPScenario Model Intercomparison ProjectTiered future projections under (SSPs) for long-term assessment.
The full roster of 21 MIPs, including others like DynVarMIP (dynamics and variability), FAOMIP (flux-anomaly-forced ocean experiments), GMMIP (monsoons), LS3MIP (land surface processes), OMIP (ocean-ice coupled modeling), PMIP (paleoclimate), RFMIP (effective ), and SolarMIP (solar variability), is detailed in CMIP6 protocols, with outputs archived via the Earth System Grid Federation. Diagnostic MIPs, such as those enhancing output for regional (e.g., CORDEX), focused on post-processing without additional computational demands. For CMIP7, initiated around 2023–2024, the endorsement process was discontinued in favor of a to reduce administrative burden and encourage ; as of , 35 are registered, covering similar themes but with emphasis on fast-track assessments for the IPCC Seventh Assessment Report, without formal WCRP vetting for all. This shift prioritizes flexibility amid evolving modeling capabilities, though core coordination via persists.

Data Infrastructure

Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF)

The Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF) is a distributed, software established in by the U.S. Department of Energy (), in affiliation with the World Climate Research Programme's Working Group on Coupled Modelling (WGCM), to facilitate the management and dissemination of climate model data for projects including CMIP. It operates as an international collaboration among climate modeling centers, providing secure, web-based access to petabytes of simulation outputs, observational datasets, and reanalyses through a network of federated nodes employing standardized protocols and interfaces. ESGF's architecture consists of dozens of geographically distributed nodes—26 active data nodes as of 2023—hosted by institutions such as (LLNL), , NOAA, the (IPSL), and the (CEDA), enabling redundant storage and high-availability replication of datasets. Data publication follows CMIP-endorsed standards, with models uploading outputs to local nodes that synchronize via federation mechanisms, ensuring global discoverability through unified search indices. Users access data via web portals supporting faceted searches by variables, models, experiments, and time periods, with download options including HTTP, GridFTP, and for large transfers. In the context of CMIP, ESGF serves as the primary repository and distribution platform, hosting outputs from phases such as CMIP5 (exceeding 5 petabytes including replicas) and CMIP6 (over 25 petabytes including replicas as of recent assessments), which underpin IPCC reports by enabling intercomparison and analysis of simulations like historical runs and scenario projections. By 2021, subsets like those at alone held approximately 3 petabytes of CMIP6 data from a project total of around 20 petabytes, distributed across millions of files. Security features include OpenID-based authentication and role-based access controls, while tools like the monitor replication status, download metrics, and node performance across the federation. Recent enhancements address scalability challenges, such as the ESGF Virtual Aggregation service introduced for CMIP6, which creates analysis-ready, cloud-optimized subsets by virtually concatenating distributed files without physical regridding or reformatting, reducing preprocessing burdens for users analyzing variables like or . Ongoing of ESGF2 aims to incorporate data-proximate computing, improved handling, and integration with services to manage anticipated growth for CMIP7, where data volumes are projected to exceed prior phases due to higher-resolution models and additional endorsed . The ESGF Review Board, comprising representatives from key institutions, oversees and technological evolution to ensure reliability for global climate research.

Standards and Quality Control

CMIP data adheres to the Climate and Forecast (CF) conventions for metadata, which specify standards for describing variables, coordinates, units, and attributes in files to ensure interoperability across models and analyses. The Climate Model Output Rewriter (CMOR) library enforces these standards by rewriting model outputs into compliant formats, incorporating controlled vocabularies for consistent terminology such as experiment names, realm designations, and variable identifiers. The CMIP6 Data Request (DREQ) further standardizes content by defining required output variables, their frequencies (e.g., monthly, daily), spatial grids, and ensemble realizations for specific experiments, minimizing variability in archived datasets across participating modeling groups. Quality control occurs in multiple stages to detect errors in , completeness, and compliance. Modeling centers perform initial checks using CMOR's built-in validations for units, bounds, and missing values, supplemented by tools like PrePARE for comprehensive metadata review and nctime for time coordinate accuracy. Upon submission to the Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF), the ESG-Publisher automates ingest controls, verifying file structure, checksums for bit-level integrity, and adherence to directory conventions via esgprep. ESGF nodes undergo validation with dedicated test suites to confirm operational readiness for data dissemination. The Quality Assurance and Quality Control Working Group ( WG), a joint effort between the World Climate Research Programme's Infrastructure Panel (WIP) and ESGF, provides ongoing guidance and develops software frameworks to enhance pre-publication checks, including metadata best practices and automated QC packages for initiatives like CMIP7's Fast Track experiments. This group recommends standardized procedures to modeling centers, such as screening for and ensuring citation completeness, though implementation relies on group-specific workflows, with no centralized enforcement beyond ESGF publication thresholds.

Scientific Contributions

Model Improvements and Intercomparisons

The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) facilitates model improvements through systematic intercomparisons of simulations from diverse global climate models, enabling identification of systematic biases and refinements in physical parameterizations. By standardizing experiments such as the Core Diagnostic Experiments () and historical simulations, CMIP allows direct evaluation against observational data, revealing areas where models diverge or converge, which informs targeted enhancements in subsequent phases. For instance, intercomparisons have highlighted persistent challenges in representation and aerosol-cloud interactions, prompting upgrades in subgrid-scale processes and vertical . In transitioning from CMIP5 to CMIP6, participating models exhibited advancements in , with many achieving horizontal grids finer than 100 km and increased vertical levels, improving the simulation of regional phenomena like precipitation intensity and seasonal migration patterns. CMIP6 ensembles demonstrated reduced biases in metrics such as the Simple Daily Intensity Index (SDII) and consecutive dry days compared to CMIP5, particularly in regions and mid-latitudes, attributable to refined convective schemes and land-surface interactions. However, intercomparisons also underscored widened in equilibrium (ECS), ranging from 1.8°C to 5.6°C across CMIP6 models, driven partly by divergent cloud feedback representations, with higher-ECS models showing amplified low-cloud responses to warming. Endorsed Model Intercomparison Projects (MIPs) within CMIP further refine specific components, such as ocean biogeochemistry and high-resolution atmospheric dynamics, yielding intercomparison datasets that quantify progress; for example, AeroMIP and Cloud Feedback MIP analyses have led to better forcing estimates, narrowing radiative imbalance discrepancies from ~0.5 W/m² in earlier phases to under 0.3 W/m² in select CMIP6 configurations. These efforts, while advancing mean-state fidelity—e.g., top-of-atmosphere and surface temperatures—reveal that intermodel spread persists in transient responses, guiding ongoing developments like hierarchical modeling approaches in CMIP7. Peer-reviewed evaluations confirm these gains but emphasize that improvements are incremental, with no phase achieving comprehensive convergence to observations in all domains.

Insights into Climate Dynamics

Multi-model ensembles from CMIP have enabled robust assessments of major modes of climate variability, such as the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO), by comparing simulations across dozens of global coupled models to isolate internal dynamics from forced responses. These ensembles reveal that ENSO's interannual variability arises primarily from ocean-atmosphere coupling in the tropical Pacific, with models consistently simulating eastward propagation of anomalies driven by wind-evaporation-SST feedbacks, though with biases in amplitude and periodicity compared to observations. Intercomparisons highlight that mean-state errors, such as excessive equatorial Pacific cold tongue bias in many models, influence ENSO teleconnections to extratropics, providing causal insights into how subsurface modulates surface variability. CMIP simulations have advanced understanding of ocean-atmosphere interactions on longer timescales, demonstrating through ensemble spreads that coupled feedbacks amplify multidecadal Atlantic variability via wind-driven circulation changes. For instance, low-frequency analysis in CMIP5 and CMIP6 models shows that (AMOC) fluctuations contribute to North Atlantic tripole patterns, with multi-model agreement on the role of and convergence in sustaining these modes. Such diagnostics underscore the importance of air-sea fluxes in damping or exciting basin-scale modes, informing first-principles views of energy redistribution in the . However, CMIP intercomparisons expose persistent deficiencies in subseasonal modes like the Madden-Julian Oscillation (MJO), where most CMIP6 models underestimate its contribution to intraseasonal variance by failing to capture eastward propagation speeds and convective organization. This highlights structural challenges in parameterizing moist convection and its coupling to large-scale circulation, limiting reliable insights into MJO-ENSO interactions despite coordinated experiments aimed at variability. Overall, while ensembles filter out individual model idiosyncrasies to yield probabilistic views of dynamical processes, discrepancies with empirical records—such as observed MJO diversity—emphasize the need for improved representations of unresolved physics.

Criticisms and Limitations

Discrepancies with Empirical Observations

Several peer-reviewed analyses have identified systematic discrepancies between CMIP6 simulations and observed surface temperature trends, particularly in models with elevated equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) values exceeding 4.5°C, which constitute over one-quarter of the ensemble and contribute to projections of amplified future warming inconsistent with historical rates. For example, evaluations of nineteen CMIP6 models found that only seven simulated global warming within ±15% of observations averaged over 2014–2023, with the ensemble mean often exceeding observed trends due to overstated ECS influences. These "hot model" issues persist despite efforts to constrain projections, as high-ECS models disproportionately influence ensemble means in impact assessments, potentially biasing estimates of hydrological and ecological responses. In the troposphere, CMIP models typically exhibit greater mid-tropospheric warming amplification than satellite and radiosonde datasets, especially in the tropics, where simulated trends outpace observations by factors of 1.5–2 over multi-decadal periods; while natural variability accounts for some differences, residual mismatches suggest shortcomings in representing convective processes and lapse rate feedbacks. Regional sea surface temperature biases compound these issues, including persistent warm anomalies in the Southern Ocean linked to inadequate simulation of upwelling, eddy activity, and cloud-radiative interactions, which affect global energy balance estimates. Precipitation patterns reveal further divergences, with CMIP6 models showing mean biases in annual totals and extremes across diverse regimes, such as overestimation in mid-to-high latitudes and discrepancies in trend magnitudes over , where simulated decreases exceed observed reductions by up to 50%. Arctic sea ice simulations similarly underperform, with interannual volume flux variability mismatched against observations, often underestimating export rates and overpredicting persistence amid declining extents. Cryospheric discrepancies extend to Greenland Ice Sheet mass loss, where models fail to capture accelerations driven by observed patterns, leading to underestimates of recent melt contributions to sea-level by 20–30%. These gaps highlight unresolved challenges in parameterizing sub-grid processes like aerosols and clouds, which propagate uncertainties in historical evaluations and future scenarios.

Debates on Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity

Equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS), defined as the long-term increase resulting from a doubling of atmospheric CO₂ concentration, has emerged as a contentious metric in evaluations of CMIP models. In CMIP5, the ensemble mean ECS was approximately 3.2°C, with individual model values ranging from 2.1°C to 4.7°C. The transition to CMIP6 saw a marked upward shift, with the multi-model mean ECS rising to 3.7°C and several models exhibiting values exceeding 5°C, such as 5.3°C in the EC-Earth3 model and 5.6°C in others. This elevation is largely ascribed to amplified positive feedbacks, particularly from low-level clouds over subtropical oceans, where models simulate greater reductions in under warming conditions compared to CMIP5. Critics contend that the higher ECS in CMIP6 reflects unresolved structural biases rather than refined physical understanding, leading to projections that overestimate historical and projected warming relative to instrumental observations. For example, energy budget analyses constrained by observed sea surface temperatures, ocean heat uptake, and from 1850–2011 yield a ECS of 2.16°C (5–95% : 1.1–3.9°C), substantially below the CMIP6 . Such estimates, derived from empirical data rather than model simulations, suggest that CMIP6's elevated cloud feedbacks may compensate for errors in other processes, including Southern Ocean shortwave radiation biases that inflate effective sensitivity. Independent assessments using instrumental records and paleoclimate proxies similarly constrain ECS to 1.5–2.5°C, highlighting a persistent discrepancy where high-ECS models fail to align with the rate of observed twentieth-century warming. The IPCC's Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) assesses ECS as likely (66% probability) between 2.5°C and 4.0°C, integrating multiple evidence lines including process understanding, paleoclimate data, and CMIP6 simulations, while acknowledging the ensemble's broader range (1.8–5.6°C). This assessment diverges from purely model-based ranges by downweighting emergent constraints from simulations that conflict with observations, yet debates continue over the validity of such weighting schemes. Proponents of higher ECS argue for narrowing uncertainty through refined cloud process representations, but critiques emphasize that CMIP6's non-random shift toward hotter outcomes—evident in only 10% of models falling below AR6's lower bound—indicates to idealized forcing experiments rather than robust empirical grounding. Recent analyses further question the reliability of high-ECS models for policy-relevant projections, proposing their exclusion or reduced weighting to mitigate overprediction risks, as these outliers disproportionately influence high-emission scenario tails. Ongoing scrutiny underscores the need for CMIP ensembles to prioritize observational fidelity over in feedback parameterizations.

Structural and Computational Challenges

Global climate models in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) encounter structural limitations stemming from their finite grid resolutions and reliance on parametrizations for subgrid-scale processes. Atmospheric components typically employ horizontal resolutions of 100–300 km, while oceanic grids average around 100 km, precluding explicit resolution of mesoscale features such as convective storms (requiring ~20 km scales) and eddies (<10 km). These constraints necessitate empirical parametrizations for phenomena like , microphysics, and , which approximate unresolved dynamics but propagate errors into simulated feedbacks, notably cloud-radiative interactions contributing to equilibrium uncertainties. Persistent biases illustrate these issues: models often produce a spurious double (ITCZ), displace midlatitude storm tracks equatorward, and underestimate extreme intensities (e.g., simulating ~40 mm/day maxima versus observed ~80 mm/day for major U.S. events). Oceanic parametrizations inadequately capture eddy-driven heat transport, yielding laminar rather than turbulent flows and biasing poleward heat uptake. Even in higher-resolution variants like those in HighResMIP (down to ~25–50 km), structural deficits in process representation persist, as refinements alone do not fully mitigate parametrization-induced discrepancies with observations, such as tropical Pacific warming patterns. Computational challenges compound these, as CMIP phases demand vast resources for multi-model ensembles. CMIP6 encompassed ~100 models across 49 groups running 190 experiments, with historical simulations requiring petascale supercomputing and often exceeding 10^5–10^6 core-hours per realization due to coupled complexity. Resulting datasets total tens of petabytes, straining storage, transfer via infrastructures like ESGF, and post-processing for intercomparisons. Scaling to finer resolutions or larger ensembles—critical for robust —increases costs superlinearly, as traditional numerical schemes resist efficient parallelization on exascale systems. Energy demands further exacerbate issues, with simulations generating significant CO2 emissions (e.g., via prolonged runs), prompting efforts like CPMIP to benchmark performance and target 50% emission reductions for CMIP7 relative to CMIP6. Reproducibility suffers from hardware evolution and software dependencies, hindering verification of results across phases.

Impact and Applications

Role in IPCC Assessments

The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) serves as the primary source of coordinated, multi-model climate simulations for the (IPCC) assessment reports, enabling standardized evaluations of historical climate behavior, attribution of observed changes, and projections of future scenarios. By organizing international modeling groups to run common experiments, CMIP produces ensembles that quantify uncertainties through model diversity, informing IPCC Working Group I (WGI) chapters on the physical science basis of . These datasets underpin assessments of key metrics, including global mean surface temperature evolution and regional climate variability. In the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report (AR4, 2007), CMIP Phase 3 (CMIP3) provided the foundational multi-model archive, supporting evaluations of coupled ocean-atmosphere general circulation models and early projections under the (SRES). This phase marked a shift toward systematic intercomparisons, allowing IPCC authors to assess model performance against observations and estimate ranges for . Subsequent phases built on this: CMIP5, aligned with AR5 (2013–2014), supplied simulations under Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs), which informed projections of 1.5–4.5°C warming by 2100 depending on emissions, while highlighting improvements in simulating phenomena like El Niño-Southern Oscillation. For the Sixth Assessment Report (AR6, 2021), CMIP Phase 6 (CMIP6) formed the core dataset for WGI, featuring higher-resolution models, enhanced representation of biogeochemical cycles, and experiments tied to Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs). CMIP6 ensembles refined estimates of transient climate response and contributed to the assessed likely range of 2.5–4.0°C for equilibrium climate sensitivity, with over 100 models from 50+ institutions generating petabytes of data analyzed for attribution statements, such as human influence on extreme events. This phase's emphasis on process-oriented diagnostics improved IPCC confidence in projections, though model spread persisted in cloud feedbacks and regional precipitation.

Broader Scientific and Policy Influence

The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) has fostered extensive international collaboration among modeling groups, enabling the production of standardized datasets that underpin research across climate-related disciplines, including , dynamics, and biogeochemical cycles. By coordinating over 100 models from dozens of institutions in phases like CMIP6, it has generated petabytes of , facilitating meta-analyses and specialized intercomparisons such as C4MIP for carbon-climate feedbacks, which inform advancements in Earth system modeling beyond core atmospheric projections. This collaborative framework has contributed to an exponential rise in CMIP-based publications, from fewer than 100 annually in the early 2000s to thousands by 2023, amplifying its role in shaping empirical investigations of climate variability. In policy domains, CMIP projections extend beyond IPCC syntheses to underpin national and regional vulnerability assessments, where multi-model ensembles provide baselines for risk evaluation and adaptation strategies. For instance, Australia's State of the Climate 2024 report incorporates downscaled CMIP5 and CMIP6 outputs to project regional temperature and precipitation shifts, guiding infrastructure resilience planning. Similarly, Canada's Changing Climate Report (2022) draws on CMIP5 and CMIP6 simulations to assess impacts on and ecosystems, informing federal adaptation policies. In the , the European Climate Risk Assessment utilizes CMIP6 data downscaled through EURO-CORDEX to evaluate sector-specific hazards like flooding and heatwaves, supporting directives on . These applications highlight CMIP's utility in translating model outputs into actionable insights for localized decision-making, though their effectiveness depends on techniques and scenario assumptions. CMIP's influence also permeates U.S. federal tools, such as the USGS National Climate Change Viewer, which visualizes CMIP-derived projections for and biodiversity conservation across ecoregions. By providing consistent forcing scenarios aligned with , CMIP supports integrated assessments that link climate drivers to socioeconomic outcomes, aiding policymakers in prioritizing investments amid uncertainties in long-term projections. This broader adoption underscores CMIP's role in bridging scientific outputs with practical governance, despite ongoing debates over model fidelity in capturing observed variability.

Future Directions

Innovations in CMIP7

CMIP7 introduces a continuous modeling framework that integrates fast-track experiment sets with the standard Diagnostic Experiments in CMIP () and endorsed Model Intercomparison Projects (), enabling ongoing scientific advancements alongside assessment needs, unlike the more discrete phases of prior iterations such as CMIP6. This evolution addresses community feedback by refining to include eight core experiments—such as AMIP (Atmosphere Model Intercomparison Project), abrupt-4xCO2, pre-industrial control (piControl), historical (extended to 2021 with updated forcings for solar, volcanic, and aerosols), Earth system model historical (esm-hist), and pre-industrial climate simulations under control, , and 4xCO2 conditions—providing a robust for model evaluation and intercomparison. A central innovation is the emphasis on emissions-driven simulations, particularly for CO2 from fossil fuels and projections, which differ from the concentration-driven approaches dominant in CMIP6 by allowing direct assessment of transient climate responses like the Transient Climate Response to cumulative CO2 Emissions (TCRE) and Zero Emissions Commitment (ZEC) through experiments such as 'flat10'. This shift enhances policy relevance for carbon budgets and scenarios, with new scenario designs including Medium (M), High (H), Medium-Low (ML), Low (L), Very Low with Limited Overshoot (VLLO), and Very Low after High Overshoot (VLHO) pathways to support diverse projection needs. The phase is framed by four Fundamental Research Questions aligned with World Climate Research Programme (WCRP) priorities, focusing on changes, multidecadal patterns, the water-carbon-climate nexus, and tipping elements, motivating targeted intercomparisons to probe . The Assessment Fast Track prioritizes timely data for the Seventh Assessment Report (IPCC AR7) and national assessments, featuring streamlined experiments and enhanced infrastructure hosted by the since 2022, including updated forcing datasets and controlled vocabularies for better data management. Sustained support for 35 community MIPs—covering regional downscaling (e.g., CORDEX), impacts (ISIMIP), ice sheets (ISMIP), and services (VIACS)—fosters specialized research while promoting high-resolution modeling and process-level studies. Additionally, the Essential Model Documentation protocol standardizes reporting to improve transparency and reproducibility, building on CMIP6 lessons to advance model evaluation against observations and facilitate innovative applications in climate services. First data from CMIP7 core experiments are anticipated in late 2025, marking a transition toward a more agile, assessment-integrated paradigm.

Long-Term Evolution and Priorities

The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) originated in 1995 under the Working Group on Coupled Modelling (WGCM) of the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP), establishing a standardized for simulations from 18 coupled general circulation models (GCMs), focusing on and perturbed runs to facilitate intercomparisons. By CMIP3 in 2005–2006, the project expanded to include 25 models and 12 experiments, marking a shift toward broader ensembles for assessing variability and projections aligned with the IPCC's Fourth . Subsequent phases, CMIP5 and CMIP6, further scaled up participation to over 50 modeling centers by CMIP6, generating datasets exceeding 14 petabytes distributed via the Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF), incorporating system models (ESMs) with biogeochemical cycles, aerosols, and scenario-driven projections under representative concentration pathways (RCPs) and (SSPs). This evolution reflects a progression from basic coupled atmosphere-ocean models to comprehensive ESMs, emphasizing coordinated multi-model diagnostics, evaluation against observations, and open-access infrastructure to quantify uncertainties in responses. CMIP's long-term priorities align with the WCRP Strategic Plan 2019–2028, which emphasizes advancing understanding of climate variability, change, and predictability through improved model components for processes like water and carbon cycles, enhanced , and development of seamless simulation tools integrating for adaptive architectures. The project prioritizes international collaboration, access, and support for UNFCCC commitments, including goals, by providing projections for IPCC assessments while reducing redundancies across 35 community-endorsed Model Intercomparison Projects (MIPs). Core experiments, such as the Diagnostic, Evaluation and Characterization of Klima () protocols—including pre-industrial control, historical, and idealized CO2 simulations—remain foundational, with updates to include emissions-driven runs and feedback mechanisms for ongoing model refinement. Looking ahead, CMIP is transitioning from discrete phases to a more continuous framework, exemplified by CMIP7's design phase, which introduces "fast track" experiment sets to expedite data for the IPCC Seventh Assessment Report (AR7), with initial outputs anticipated in early 2026. CMIP7's priorities center on four fundamental research questions: the co-evolution of tropical and high-latitude patterns; changes in dangerous weather patterns; Earth system responses to management; and risks of tipping points across trajectories. This entails prioritizing emissions-based simulations, integration of land and ocean MIPs into core , and community-driven evaluations to address persistent biases, such as in regional and feedbacks, while minimizing computational demands through targeted variable requests and best-practice standards. Overall, the trajectory emphasizes empirical constraint of model projections, causal process understanding, and policy-relevant insights into low-probability, high-impact events, sustaining CMIP's role as a cornerstone for global science amid advancing computational capabilities.

References

  1. [1]
    Coupled Model Intercomparison Project: CMIP
    CMIP is a project of the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP) providing climate projections to understand past, present and future climate changes.Project office · Climate Model Benchmarking · Climate Model Documentation · MIPs
  2. [2]
    CMIP6 - Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 - PCMDI
    CMIP6 is the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6, overseen by the WCRP Working Group on Coupled Modelling.
  3. [3]
    Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) - PCMDI
    CMIP is the analog of AMIP for global coupled ocean-atmosphere models, aiming to improve climate understanding and provide future climate change estimates.
  4. [4]
    CMIP5 - Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 - Overview
    CMIP5 is a coordinated climate model experiment to assess model differences, examine climate predictability, and provide a framework for climate change ...Data Description · Data Portal · Getting Started · History
  5. [5]
    CMIP Phase 6 (CMIP6) - Coupled Model Intercomparison Project
    CMIP is a project of the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP) providing climate projections to understand past, present and future climate changes. CMIP and ...CMIP Data Access · The CMIP6-Endorsed MIPs · CMIP Phase 6 Plus (CMIP6Plus)
  6. [6]
  7. [7]
    [PDF] Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 ...
    Mar 29, 2018 · CMIP is a project coordinating climate model experiments to understand past, present, and future climate. CMIP6 is the sixth phase, with a ...
  8. [8]
    Overview - PCMDI - Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
    This unprecedented collection of recent model output is officially known as the "WCRP CMIP3 multi-model dataset." It is meant to serve IPCC's Working Group 1.
  9. [9]
    CMIP Overview - Coupled Model Intercomparison Project
    What is CMIP? The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) is an international climate modelling project, designed to better understand past, present and ...Missing: definition | Show results with:definition
  10. [10]
    Working Group on Coupled Modelling (WGCM) - Overview
    Feb 5, 2025 · The overall mission of the WCRP Working Group on Coupled Modeling (WGCM) is to foster the development and review of coupled climate models.
  11. [11]
    CMIP - History - PCMDI - Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
    In 1995 the JSC/CLIVAR Working Group on Coupled Models, part of the World Climate Research Program, established the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP; ...
  12. [12]
    [PDF] The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project – History, Uses, and ...
    The results of the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) are currently being analysed and will form the basis of the IPCC Sixth ...Missing: achievements | Show results with:achievements
  13. [13]
    CMIP1 evaluation and intercomparison of coupled climate models
    Aug 6, 2025 · The climates simulated by 15 coupled atmosphere/ocean climate models participating in the first phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison ...
  14. [14]
    Catalogue of Model Intercomparison Projects | www.clivar.org
    CMIP was initiatied in 1995 by the CLIVAR Working Group on Coupled Models (WGCM), and continues to compare simulations from global coupled climate models with ...<|separator|>
  15. [15]
    CMIP2 - PCMDI - Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
    Jan 7, 1997 · CMIP2 Announcement January 7, 1997. Dear Colleague,. In our announcement for the first phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project ...
  16. [16]
    [PDF] THE WCRP CMIP3 MULTIMODEL DATASET
    Subsequently, another modeling group has contributed data to CMIP3, so that the WCRP CMIP3 multimodel dataset now consists of 17 modeling groups from 12 ...
  17. [17]
    CMIP Phase 3 (CMIP3) - Coupled Model Intercomparison Project
    CMIP is a project of the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP) providing climate projections to understand past, present and future climate changes. CMIP and ...
  18. [18]
    CMIP Phase 5 (CMIP5) - Coupled Model Intercomparison Project
    CMIP is a project of the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP) providing climate projections to understand past, present and future climate changes.Missing: goals | Show results with:goals
  19. [19]
    CMIP5 Experiments - IPCC Data Distribution Centre
    Simulations extended to at least the end of 2012 using some estimate of recent and future forcing. Groups are free to use whatever concentrations, solar forcing ...<|separator|>
  20. [20]
    [PDF] A Summary of the CMIP5 Experiment Design - PCMDI
    Dec 18, 2009 · In the IPCC assessment context, it is expected that CMIP5 will provide information of value to all three IPCC Working. Groups. 1 There are many ...
  21. [21]
    [PDF] CMIP5 data provided at the IPCC Data Distribution Centre
    CMIP5 is a multi-model dataset for studying climate, variability, and change, used to assess model differences and provide climate futures.
  22. [22]
    Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 ...
    The objective of CMIP is to better understand past, present, and future climate change in a multi-model context. CMIP's increasing importance and scope is a ...Metrics · Assets · Peer review · Related articles<|control11|><|separator|>
  23. [23]
    CMIP Phase 6 (CMIP6) - Coupled Model Intercomparison Project
    Such an evaluation system will be implemented for CMIP6. Our initial goal is that two capabilities will be used to produce a broad characterization of CMIP DECK ...CMIP Data Access · CMIP Phase 6 Plus (CMIP6Plus) · The CMIP6-Endorsed MIPs
  24. [24]
    Coupled Model Intercomparison Project: CMIP
    CMIP is a project of the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP) providing climate projections to understand past, present and future climate changes. CMIP.
  25. [25]
    CMIP6 – description and comparison to CMIP5
    May 19, 2025 · The CMIP6 ensemble of model simulations was produced in 2015-2021 and was a key input to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) ...<|separator|>
  26. [26]
    CMIP6: the next generation of climate models explained - Carbon Brief
    Dec 2, 2019 · CMIP6 will consist of the “runs” from around 100 distinct climate models being produced across 49 different modelling groups.Cmip6: The Next Generation... · Future Emission Scenarios · Cmip6 Historical Simulations
  27. [27]
    CMIP Phase 7 (CMIP7) - Coupled Model Intercomparison Project
    CMIP is a project of the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP) providing climate projections to understand past, present and future climate changes. CMIP and ...Phase 2 consultation · CMIP7 Forcing Datasets · CMIP7 Data Request
  28. [28]
    CMIP Phases - Coupled Model Intercomparison Project
    CMIP has been organised in different phases, each with new and improved climate model experiment protocols, standards, and data distribution mechanisms.Missing: details | Show results with:details
  29. [29]
    CMIP7 and the Assessment Fast Track: Launching the Next Phase ...
    Oct 1, 2025 · The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) has long been a cornerstone of international climate research and assessment.Missing: achievements | Show results with:achievements
  30. [30]
    An evolving Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 7 ... - GMD
    Oct 1, 2025 · We identify four fundamental research questions motivating a seventh phase of coupled model intercomparison relating to patterns of sea surface ...
  31. [31]
    Earth System Forcing for CMIP7 and Beyond in - AMS Journals
    Preparation for the next phase of coordinated Earth system model experimentation, the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 7 (CMIP7), is well underway.
  32. [32]
    CMIP7 Data Request - Coupled Model Intercomparison Project
    The CMIP7 Data Request is being developed through the new Harmonised Thematic Variables process, managed by the Data Request Task Team.
  33. [33]
    CMIP7 the next phase: ongoing status and planning
    Planning is underway for the next CMIP phase, CMIP7, with the first data anticipated in late 2025. Following CMIP6's success, broad community engagement ...
  34. [34]
    CMIP6 Guidance for Data Users - PCMDI
    The official names of the currently endorsed CMIP6 MIP activities are recorded in a “json” file. When called for by the experiment protocol, standard forcing ...
  35. [35]
    [PDF] Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 ...
    May 26, 2016 · 2. The MIP demonstrates connectivity to the DECK experiments and the CMIP6 historical simulations. 3. The MIP adopts the CMIP modelling ...
  36. [36]
    CMIP6 Historical Simulations (1850–2014) With GISS‐E2.1 - Miller
    Nov 21, 2020 · The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) was conceived to facilitate coordinated experiments of past and future climate among modeling ...Models and Experiments · Forcing · Historical Response · Conclusions
  37. [37]
    Evaluation of historical CMIP6 model simulations of extreme ...
    These historical simulations are the ''entry card'' for all models participating in the CMIP6 project. The most popular approach for analyzing historical and ...
  38. [38]
    The Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) for CMIP6
    ScenarioMIP is the primary activity within CMIP6 that provides multi-model climate projections based on alternative scenarios of future emissions and land use ...
  39. [39]
    ScenarioMIP - Coupled Model Intercomparison Project
    ScenarioMIP simulates earth system models using alternative futures of emissions and land use, and is part of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project.Scientific Steering Committee · Advisory Group · Events
  40. [40]
    [PDF] The Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) for CMIP7
    ScenarioMIP provides scenarios for climate models, used as external forcings to explore future socio-economic conditions and assess climate change impacts.
  41. [41]
    Description of historical and future projection simulations by ... - GMD
    May 16, 2022 · This paper documents the experimental setup and general features of the coupled historical and future climate simulations
  42. [42]
    [PDF] Overview CMIP6-Endorsed MIPs
    The CMIP6 design will be described in a Geoscientific Model Development special issue with submissions of an overview paper and the CMIP6-Endorsed MIP ...
  43. [43]
    [PDF] 2016 Earth System Grid Federation Annual Report - OSTI
    May 10, 2016 · ESGF was established in 1999 by the DOE, in affiliation with the WCRP Working Group on Coupled. Modeling (WGCM), to support CMIP. It provides ...Missing: history | Show results with:history
  44. [44]
    ESGF Mission - Earth System Grid Federation
    It supports the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP), whose protocols enable the periodic assessments carried out by the IPCC. Using a system of ...<|separator|>
  45. [45]
    Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF)
    ESGF provides researcher's access to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 and 6 (CMIP5 and CMIP6) model data that served as the basis for IPCC AR5, ...
  46. [46]
    [PDF] International Consortium Developing the Next Generation Earth ...
    Oct 23, 2023 · The distributed ESGF network, consisting of 26 data nodes that host over 15 million datasets from 37 data projects, has delivered more than 1.35 ...
  47. [47]
    CMIP Modelling Centres and ESGF Nodes
    Below is a map showing the CMIP6 modelling centres and ESGF nodes. Where there are multiple modelling centres and nodes in a similar location, pins (yellow) ...
  48. [48]
    Coordinating an operational data distribution network for CMIP6 data
    Jan 29, 2021 · The distribution of data contributed to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) is via the Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF).
  49. [49]
    ESGF MetaGrid
    CMIP6 Data Info. Filter By Transfer Options. Any Only Globus ... Dataset ID. Files. Total Size. Version. Download Options, Globus Ready ...CMIP6 Homepage · PCMDI - CMIP5 Overview · 0 CartMissing: volume | Show results with:volume
  50. [50]
    [PDF] ESGF2-US: Data Proximate Computing and Services to Accelerate ...
    ESGF Holdings are Large. ○ CMIP5 totals >5 PB. (including replicas). ○ CMIP6 totals >25 PB. (including replicas). ○ CMIP7 is expected to have more high ...
  51. [51]
    Disseminating essential climate data CMIP and ESGF
    Oct 5, 2021 · Currently, the CEDA Archive holds approximately three petabytes of CMIP6 data (of a total 20 Petabytes produced across the project).<|control11|><|separator|>
  52. [52]
    The ESGF Dashboard - CMCC Foundation
    The ESGF Dashboard automatically captures several useful metrics by today's standards and provides a distributed and scalable monitoring framework.
  53. [53]
    The Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF) Virtual Aggregation ...
    Apr 30, 2025 · The ESGF Virtual Aggregation is one of several solutions to provide an out-of-the-box aggregated and analysis-ready view of those variables.
  54. [54]
    [PDF] Building the Next Generation Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF2)
    The Earth System Grid Federation. (ESGF) is a globally distributed peer-to-peer network of data servers using a common set of protocols and.
  55. [55]
    [PDF] WCRP Climate Model Intercomparisons: Where we are and how we ...
    • ESGF Review Board (ERB) consists* of institutions and individuals whose goal is to advance ESGF technology by providing development direction and oversight.<|separator|>
  56. [56]
    CMIP6 Participation Guidance for Modelers - PCMDI
    The CMIP6 protocol and experiments are described in a special issue of Geoscientific Model Development with an overview of the overall design and scientific ...
  57. [57]
    Getting started overview | CMOR 3
    CMOR3 is a software library to produce CF-compliant netCDF files, reducing effort to prepare and manage model output for climate community experiments.
  58. [58]
    The CMIP6 Data Request (DREQ, version 01.00.31) - GMD
    Jan 28, 2020 · The data request of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) defines all the quantities from CMIP6 simulations that should be archived.
  59. [59]
    CMIP6 Participation Guidance for Data Managers - PCMDI
    6. Validation with ESGF test suite. This section describes the usage of the ESGF test suite that will validate that a data or index node is working as expected ...
  60. [60]
    Quality Assurance and Quality Control Working Group
    This joint working group of the WIP and ESGF is focused on enhancing the quality assurance and control of data prior to publication on ESGF.
  61. [61]
    Applicability of CMIP5 and CMIP6 Models in China - AMS Journals
    Compared to CMIP5, CMIP6 models feature increases in spatial resolution, improvements ... Gao, 2022: Added value of CMIP6 models over CMIP5 models in simulating ...
  62. [62]
    Comparison of CMIP6 and CMIP5 models in simulating mean and ...
    May 18, 2021 · The CMIP6-MME performed better than the CMIP5-MME with lesser biases in simulating Simple Daily Intensity Index (SDII), consecutive dry days ( ...
  63. [63]
    Causes of Higher Climate Sensitivity in CMIP6 Models - AGU Journals
    Jan 3, 2020 · Here we show that the closely related effective climate sensitivity has increased substantially in Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 6 (CMIP6)Introduction · Data and Methodology · Results · Conclusions and Discussion<|control11|><|separator|>
  64. [64]
    Cloud properties and their projected changes in CMIP models ... - ACP
    Feb 5, 2024 · Over the Southern Ocean, the low-ECS models show a higher sensitivity of the net cloud radiative effect to warming than the high-ECS models.
  65. [65]
    Comparison of past and future simulations of ENSO in CMIP5 ... - CP
    Sep 28, 2020 · A comparison of changes in ENSO in a range of past and future climate simulations can provide insights into the sensitivity of ENSO to changes in the mean ...
  66. [66]
    Evaluation of Leading Modes of Climate Variability in the CMIP ...
    Here the skill of models in reproducing observed modes of climate variability is assessed, both across and within the CMIP3, CMIP5, and CMIP6 archives.
  67. [67]
    Ocean–Atmosphere Dynamical Coupling Fundamental to the ...
    This study isolates the mechanisms driving Atlantic sea surface temperature variability on multidecadal time scales by using low-frequency component analysis ( ...
  68. [68]
    Advances in atmospheric, oceanic, and coupled models for ...
    Oct 10, 2025 · Integration of multiple sub-models to simulate interactions among Earth system components. Atmosphere + Ocean + Land + Sea ice + biosphere (as ...
  69. [69]
    Underestimated MJO Variability in CMIP6 Models - Le - AGU Journals
    May 4, 2021 · We show that the MJO contribution to the total intraseasonal climate variability is substantially underestimated in most CMIP6 models.
  70. [70]
    Underestimated MJO Variability in CMIP6 Models - PMC
    We show that the MJO contribution to the total intraseasonal climate variability is substantially underestimated in most CMIP6 models.
  71. [71]
    MJO Diversity in CMIP6 Models in - AMS Journals
    Aug 27, 2024 · Recent studies have shown that individual Madden–Julian oscillation (MJO) events can be categorized into four types based on their propagation characteristics.
  72. [72]
    Inferring future warming in the Arctic from the observed global ...
    This indicates that CMIP6 models tend to overestimate global warming over the past 30 years, which is also the case in CMIP5 models (Fyfe et al., 2013). For ...Inferring Future Warming In... · 2. Data And Method · 3. Linkage Between Past...
  73. [73]
    Understanding the influence of “hot” models in climate impact studies
    Dec 11, 2023 · This large-sample study looks at the impact of removing hot models on the projections of future streamflow over 3107 North American catchments.
  74. [74]
    Comparing Tropospheric Warming in Climate Models and Satellite ...
    In fact, our results suggest that CMIP5 models overestimate observed temperature variability on these time scales (Santer et al. 2013b), which implies that ...
  75. [75]
    Natural variability contributes to model–satellite differences in ...
    Mar 22, 2021 · Our results indicate that multidecadal variability can explain current model–observational differences in the rate of tropical tropospheric warming.
  76. [76]
    Origins of Southern Ocean warm sea surface temperature bias in ...
    Aug 24, 2023 · A few previous studies have proposed possible causes of the SO warm SST bias in CMIP models. For instance, ref. found in a large set of CMIP5 ...
  77. [77]
    Evaluating CMIP6 precipitation simulations across different rainfall ...
    Mar 20, 2025 · The mean bias analysis (Table 7) revealed considerable discrepancies between the CMIP6 model simulations and the observed rainfall data.
  78. [78]
    Regional climate change: consensus, discrepancies, and ways ...
    The CMIP6 model-observation precipitation trend discrepancy over SESA is shown in Figure 4 from Varuolo-Clarke et al. (2021). To capture the magnitude of the ...
  79. [79]
    An assessment of the CMIP6 performance in simulating Arctic sea ...
    As previously mentioned, the interannual variation of sea ice volume flux simulated by CMIP6 models exhibits remarkable discrepancy compared to the ...
  80. [80]
    Discrepancies between observations and climate models of large ...
    Nov 14, 2022 · This comparison reveals the importance of observed winds in causing the recent acceleration of GrIS melt and corresponding increase in the rate ...
  81. [81]
    Peer review - Bias in CMIP6 models as compared to observed ... - ACP
    The discrepancies between observations and models are largest in China, which we suggest is in part due to erroneous aerosol precursor emission inventories in ...
  82. [82]
    Understanding equilibrium climate sensitivity changes from CMIP5 ...
    Apr 1, 2025 · The models have a stronger precipitation response and higher ECS when only dominating by one type of rainfall response.
  83. [83]
    Objectively combining climate sensitivity evidence | Climate Dynamics
    Sep 19, 2022 · This study evaluates the methodology of and results from a particularly influential assessment of climate sensitivity that combined multiple lines of evidence.Missing: critique | Show results with:critique
  84. [84]
    Biased Estimates of Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity and Transient ...
    Dec 9, 2021 · This study assesses the effective climate sensitivity (EffCS) and transient climate response (TCR) derived from global energy budget constraints within ...
  85. [85]
    The Southern Ocean Radiative Bias, Cloud Compensating Errors ...
    Nov 27, 2021 · Analysis of Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) models has focused on their higher equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) ...
  86. [86]
    Chapter 7: The Earth's Energy Budget, Climate Feedbacks, and ...
    Before AR6, the assessment of ECS relied on either CO 2 ... The boxes represent the model ranges for CMIP5 and CMIP6 and the range assessed in AR6.
  87. [87]
    On the climate sensitivity and historical warming evolution in recent ...
    Jul 6, 2020 · Here we compare the CMIP5 and CMIP6 model ensembles and find a systematic shift between CMIP eras to be unexplained as a process of random sampling.
  88. [88]
    Opinion: Can uncertainty in climate sensitivity be narrowed further?
    Feb 29, 2024 · The distributions could nonetheless be narrowed in the future, particularly through better understanding of certain climate processes and paleoclimate proxies.
  89. [89]
    The Impact of “Hot Models” on a CMIP6 Ensemble Used by Climate ...
    Mar 15, 2024 · Schlund, 2020: Context for interpreting equilibrium climate sensitivity and transient climate response from the CMIP6 Earth system models.
  90. [90]
    [PDF] Climate Models An Assessment of Strengths and Limitations
    Recommendations made in this report regarding programmatic and organizational changes, and the adequacy of current budgets, reflect the judgment of the report's.
  91. [91]
    [PDF] The importance of horizontal model resolution on simulated ... - WCD
    Mar 15, 2021 · The models used in this study are a selection of CMIP5 global models (corresponding to ∼ 100–300 km horizontal grid spacing at mid-latitudes); ...
  92. [92]
    Higher-Resolution Climate Models Do Not Consistently Reproduce ...
    We demonstrate that even higher-resolution models do not capture the observed warming pattern of the tropical Pacific Ocean that is closer to observations.<|separator|>
  93. [93]
    CMIP6 HighResMIP global climate model resolution studies
    The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) HighResMIP experiments are designed to understand the impact of the horizontal resolution of climate ...
  94. [94]
    Climate modelers grapple with their own carbon emissions - Science
    Apr 29, 2024 · “What everyone needs is a small supercomputer for a long time,” Sreepathi says. The long run times push up power consumption and emissions.
  95. [95]
    The computational and energy cost of simulation and storage ... - GMD
    Apr 19, 2024 · This paper presents the main findings obtained from the CPMIP (the Computational Performance Model Intercomparison Project), a collection of a common set of ...
  96. [96]
    [PDF] Benefits and Challenges of High-Resolution Global Climate ...
    Aug 5, 2022 · Benefits and Challenges ... CMIP5/6 simulations). • These traditional numerical methods are not “trivially” amenable for massive parallel computer.
  97. [97]
    [PDF] HPC Challenges for CMIP: lessons from CMIP6 and potential next ...
    May 9, 2022 · How do we lower our carbon footprint? ➔ Can we reduce CMIP7 CO2 emissions by 50% relative to. CMIP6? ➔ How much of CMIP6 simulations ...
  98. [98]
    A Perspective on the Future of CMIP - Stevens - 2024 - AGU Journals
    Feb 21, 2024 · The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) has demonstrated the importance of climate modeling for climate research and its usefulness for climate ...1 Kudos · 3 The Operational Burden · 4 Serving Society And...Missing: challenges | Show results with:challenges
  99. [99]
    1.5.3 Coupled Models: Evolution, Use, Assessment
    The development of coupled models induced the development of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP), which studied coupled ocean-atmosphere GCMs ...<|separator|>
  100. [100]
    The IPCC Sixth Assessment Report WGIII climate ... - GMD
    Dec 20, 2022 · This work provides a community tool for assessing the temperature outcomes of emissions pathways and provides a basis for further work.Metrics · Assets · Peer review
  101. [101]
    [PDF] Summary for Policymakers
    Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) climate model simulations (see Box SPM.1) of the temperature response to both human and natural.
  102. [102]
    GFDL's Contribution to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project
    Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) is an international effort to improve climate models by comparing multiple model simulations to observations ...Missing: achievements | Show results with:achievements<|separator|>
  103. [103]
    Progress and Trends in Coupled Model Intercomparison Project ...
    We aimed to investigate the progress and trends of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) and its use of multi-model archives. Therefore, we set the ...
  104. [104]
    Use of CMIP in policy - Coupled Model Intercomparison Project
    CMIP projections are now used extensively in national and regional climate change assessments supporting risk analysis, impact and adaptation planning.
  105. [105]
    CMIP6 and Shared Socio-economic Pathways overview
    Oct 3, 2023 · The Sixth Phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) was organized by the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP). The WCRP ...Missing: achievements | Show results with:achievements
  106. [106]
    Approaches for using CMIP projections in climate model ensembles ...
    Feb 7, 2024 · The purpose of this document is to provide information on approaches for developing ensembles of climate futures using global climate models (GCMs).Approaches For Gcm Selection... · Bayesian Model Averaging · References Cited
  107. [107]
    National Climate Change Viewer (NCCV) | U.S. Geological Survey
    The USGS National Climate Change Viewer (NCCV) is a web application for visualizing climate projections from the Climate Model Intercomparison Program (CMIP)Missing: strategies | Show results with:strategies
  108. [108]
    The need for carbon-emissions-driven climate projections in CMIP7
    Nov 19, 2024 · We propose that CMIP7 efforts prioritize simulations driven by CO 2 emissions from fossil fuel use and projected deployment of carbon dioxide removal ...
  109. [109]
    [PDF] WCRP Strategic Plan 2019–2028
    To meet these new challenges and opportunities, WCRP has developed this Strategic Plan for the next decade to ensure that climate science provides the ...