Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32676174›Full record

ArticleThe cryosphere2019

Design and results of the ice sheet model initialisation experiments initMIP-Greenland: an ISMIP6 intercomparison.

Heiko Goelzer, Sophie Nowicki, Tamsin Edwards, Matthew Beckley, Ayako Abe-Ouchi, Andy Aschwanden, Reinhard Calov, Olivier Gagliardini, Fabien Gillet-Chaulet, Nicholas R Golledge and 21 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The cryosphere, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
11.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 137 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Recent Progress in Greenland Ice Sheet Modelling.Current climate change reports · 2017
    Review
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

31 authors at 20 institutions in 9 countries.

Heiko GoelzerUtrecht University, Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Research (IMAU), Utrecht, Netherlands.
Sophie NowickiNASA GSFC, Cryospheric Sciences Branch, Greenbelt, USA.
Tamsin EdwardsSchool of Environment, Earth & Ecosystem Sciences, The Open University, Milton Keynes, United Kingdom.
Matthew BeckleyNASA GSFC, Cryospheric Sciences Branch, Greenbelt, USA.
Ayako Abe-OuchiAtmosphere Ocean Research Institute, University of Tokyo, Kashiwa, Japan.
Andy AschwandenGeophysical Institute, University of Alaska Fairbanks, USA.
Reinhard CalovPotsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Potsdam, Germany.
Olivier GagliardiniUniv. Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, IRD, Grenoble INP, IGE, F-38000 Grenoble, France.
Fabien Gillet-ChauletUniv. Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, IRD, Grenoble INP, IGE, F-38000 Grenoble, France.
Nicholas R GolledgeAntarctic Research Centre, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand.
Jonathan GregoryDepartment of Meteorology, University of Reading, Reading, United Kingdom.
Ralf GreveInstitute of Low Temperature Science, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan.
Angelika HumbertAlfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research, Bremerhaven, Germany.
Philippe HuybrechtsVrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.
Joseph H KennedyClimate Change Science Institute, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, USA.
Eric LarourJet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, USA.
William H LipscombLos Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, USA.
Sébastien Le ClećhLSCE/IPSL, Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l'Environnement, CEA-CNRS-UVSQ, Gif-sur-Yvette, France.
Victoria LeeUniversity of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Mathieu MorlighemUniversity of California Irvine, Irvine, USA.
Frank PattynLaboratoire de Glaciologie, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Antony J PayneUniversity of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Christian RodehackeDanish Meteorological Institute, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Martin RückampAlfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research, Bremerhaven, Germany.
Fuyuki SaitoJapan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology, Yokohama, Japan.
Nicole SchlegelJet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, USA.
Helene SeroussiJet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, USA.
Andrew ShepherdSchool of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, United Kingdom.
Sainan SunLaboratoire de Glaciologie, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Roderik van de WalUtrecht University, Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Research (IMAU), Utrecht, Netherlands.
Florian A ZiemenMax Planck Institute for Meteorology, Hamburg, Germany.
Alfred-Wegener-Institut Helmholtz-Zentrum für Polar- und Meeresforschung · DEJet Propulsion Laboratory · USUniversité Libre de Bruxelles · BEInstitut polytechnique de Grenoble · FRNaval Research Laboratory Information Technology DivisionUniversity of Bristol · GBCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRHokkaido University · JPJapan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology · JPMax Planck Institute for Meteorology · DEMet Office · GBNSF National Center for Atmospheric Research · USOak Ridge National Laboratory · USPotsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research · DEThe Open University · GBThe University of Tokyo · JPUniversity of Alaska Fairbanks · USUniversity of Applied Sciences Utrecht · NLUniversity of California, Irvine · USUniversity of Leeds · GB

Funding

Science Earth Science System NASA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Earlier large-scale Greenland ice sheet sea-level projections (e.g., those run during the ice2sea and SeaRISE initiatives) have shown that ice sheet initial conditions have a large effect on the projections and give rise to important uncertainties. The goal of the initMIP-Greenland intercomparison exercise is to compare, evaluate and improve the initialisation techniques used in the ice sheet modelling community and to estimate the associated uncertainties in modelled mass changes. initMIP-Greenland is the first in a series of ice sheet model intercomparison activities within ISMIP6 (the Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison Project for CMIP6), which is the primary activity within the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project - phase 6 (CMIP6) focusing on the ice sheets. Two experiments for the large-scale Greenland ice sheet have been designed to allow intercomparison between participating models of 1) the initial present-day state of the ice sheet and 2) the response in two idealised forward experiments. The forward experiments serve to evaluate the initialisation in terms of model drift (forward run without additional forcing) and in response to a large perturbation (prescribed surface mass balance anomaly), and should not be interpreted as sea-level projections. We present and discuss results that highlight the diversity of data sets, boundary conditions and initialisation techniques used in the community to generate initial states of the Greenland ice sheet. We find good agreement across the ensemble for the dynamic response to surface mass balance changes in areas where the simulated ice sheets overlap, but differences arising from the initial size of the ice sheet. The model drift in the control experiment is reduced for models that participated in earlier intercomparison exercises.

Identifiers

PMID32676174
PMCPMC7365265
OpenAlexW2735264555

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.