ALBERT

Description: The Ocean Model Intercomparison Project (OMIP) focuses on the physics and biogeochemistry of the ocean component of Earth system models participating in the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). OMIP aims to provide standard protocols and diagnostics for ocean models, while offering a forum to promote their common assessment and improvement. It also offers to compare solutions of the same ocean models when forced with reanalysis data (OMIP simulations) vs. when integrated within fully coupled Earth system models (CMIP6). Here we detail simulation protocols and diagnostics for OMIP's biogeochemical and inert chemical tracers. These passive-tracer simulations will be coupled to ocean circulation models, initialized with observational data or output from a model spin-up, and forced by repeating the 1948–2009 surface fluxes of heat, fresh water, and momentum. These so-called OMIP-BGC simulations include three inert chemical tracers (CFC-11, CFC-12, SF6) and biogeochemical tracers (e.g., dissolved inorganic carbon, carbon isotopes, alkalinity, nutrients, and oxygen). Modelers will use their preferred prognostic BGC model but should follow common guidelines for gas exchange and carbonate chemistry. Simulations include both natural and total carbon tracers. The required forced simulation (omip1) will be initialized with gridded observational climatologies. An optional forced simulation (omip1-spunup) will be initialized instead with BGC fields from a long model spin-up, preferably for 2000 years or more, and forced by repeating the same 62-year meteorological forcing. That optional run will also include abiotic tracers of total dissolved inorganic carbon and radiocarbon, CTabio and 14CTabio, to assess deep-ocean ventilation and distinguish the role of physics vs. biology. These simulations will be forced by observed atmospheric histories of the three inert gases and CO2 as well as carbon isotope ratios of CO2. OMIP-BGC simulation protocols are founded on those from previous phases of the Ocean Carbon-Cycle Model Intercomparison Project. They have been merged and updated to reflect improvements concerning gas exchange, carbonate chemistry, and new data for initial conditions and atmospheric gas histories. Code is provided to facilitate their implementation.

Description: The Ocean Model Intercomparison Project (OMIP) is an endorsed project in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). OMIP addresses CMIP6 science questions, investigating the origins and consequences of systematic model biases. It does so by providing a framework for evaluating (including assessment of systematic biases), understanding, and improving ocean, sea-ice, tracer, and biogeochemical components of climate and earth system models contributing to CMIP6. Among the WCRP Grand Challenges in climate science (GCs), OMIP primarily contributes to the regional sea level change and near-term (climate/decadal) prediction GCs. OMIP provides (a) an experimental protocol for global ocean/sea-ice models run with a prescribed atmospheric forcing; and (b) a protocol for ocean diagnostics to be saved as part of CMIP6. We focus here on the physical component of OMIP, with a companion paper (Orr et al., 2016) detailing methods for the inert chemistry and interactive biogeochemistry. The physical portion of the OMIP experimental protocol follows the interannual Coordinated Ocean-ice Reference Experiments (CORE-II). Since 2009, CORE-I (Normal Year Forcing) and CORE-II (Interannual Forcing) have become the standard methods to evaluate global ocean/sea-ice simulations and to examine mechanisms for forced ocean climate variability. The OMIP diagnostic protocol is relevant for any ocean model component of CMIP6, including the DECK (Diagnostic, Evaluation and Characterization of Klima experiments), historical simulations, FAFMIP (Flux Anomaly Forced MIP), C4MIP (Coupled Carbon Cycle Climate MIP), DAMIP (Detection and Attribution MIP), DCPP (Decadal Climate Prediction Project), ScenarioMIP, HighResMIP (High Resolution MIP), as well as the ocean/sea-ice OMIP simulations

Description: We present a new framework for global ocean- sea-ice model simulations based on phase 2 of the Ocean Model Intercomparison Project (OMIP-2), making use of the surface dataset based on the Japanese 55-year atmospheric reanalysis for driving ocean-sea-ice models (JRA55-do).We motivate the use of OMIP-2 over the framework for the first phase of OMIP (OMIP-1), previously referred to as the Coordinated Ocean-ice Reference Experiments (COREs), via the evaluation of OMIP-1 and OMIP-2 simulations from 11 state-of-the-science global ocean-sea-ice models. In the present evaluation, multi-model ensemble means and spreads are calculated separately for the OMIP-1 and OMIP-2 simulations and overall performance is assessed considering metrics commonly used by ocean modelers. Both OMIP-1 and OMIP-2 multi-model ensemble ranges capture observations in more than 80% of the time and region for most metrics, with the multi-model ensemble spread greatly exceeding the difference between the means of the two datasets. Many features, including some climatologically relevant ocean circulation indices, are very similar between OMIP-1 and OMIP- 2 simulations, and yet we could also identify key qualitative improvements in transitioning from OMIP-1 to OMIP- 2. For example, the sea surface temperatures of the OMIP- 2 simulations reproduce the observed global warming during the 1980s and 1990s, as well as the warming slowdown in the 2000s and the more recent accelerated warming, which were absent in OMIP-1, noting that the last feature is part of the design of OMIP-2 because OMIP-1 forcing stopped in 2009. A negative bias in the sea-ice concentration in summer of both hemispheres in OMIP-1 is significantly reduced in OMIP-2. The overall reproducibility of both seasonal and interannual variations in sea surface temperature and sea surface height (dynamic sea level) is improved in OMIP-2. These improvements represent a new capability of the OMIP-2 framework for evaluating processlevel responses using simulation results. Regarding the sensitivity of individual models to the change in forcing, the models show well-ordered responses for the metrics that are directly forced, while they show less organized responses for those that require complex model adjustments. Many of the remaining common model biases may be attributed either to errors in representing important processes in ocean-sea-ice models, some of which are expected to be reduced by using finer horizontal and/or vertical resolutions, or to shared biases and limitations in the atmospheric forcing. In particular, further efforts are warranted to resolve remaining issues in OMIP-2 such as the warm bias in the upper layer, the mismatch between the observed and simulated variability of heat content and thermosteric sea level before 1990s, and the erroneous representation of deep and bottom water formations and circulations. We suggest that such problems can be resolved through collaboration between those developing models (including parameterizations) and forcing datasets. Overall, the present assessment justifies our recommendation that future model development and analysis studies use the OMIP-2 framework.