Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
K. Taylor, R. Stouffer, G. Meehl (2012)
An overview of CMIP5 and the experiment designBulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 93
K. Trenberth, J. Fasullo, J. Kiehl (2009)
Earth's Global Energy BudgetBulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 90
F. Hourdin, J. Grandpeix, C. Rio, S. Bony, A. Jam, F. Chéruy, N. Rochetin, L. Fairhead, A. Idelkadi, I. Musat, J. Dufresne, A. Lahellec, M. Lefebvre, R. Roehrig (2013)
LMDZ5B: the atmospheric component of the IPSL climate model with revisited parameterizations for clouds and convectionClimate Dynamics, 40
C. Miao, Q. Duan, Qiaohong Sun, Yong Huang, Dongxian Kong, Tiantian Yang, A. Ye, Z. Di, W. Gong (2014)
Assessment of CMIP5 climate models and projected temperature changes over Northern EurasiaEnvironmental Research Letters, 9
A. Lahellec, Stéphane Hallegatte, J. Grandpeix, Patrice Dumas, Stéphane Blanco (2008)
Feedback characteristics of nonlinear dynamical systemsEPL (Europhysics Letters), 81
El Niflo, F. Jin, J. Neelin, M. Ghil (1994)
El Ni�o on the Devil's Staircase: Annual Subharmonic Steps to ChaosScience, 264
S. Bony, R. Colman, V. Kattsov, R. Allan, C. Bretherton, J. Dufresne, A. Hall, S. Hallegatte, M. Holland, W. Ingram, D. Randall, B. Soden, G. Tselioudis, M. Webb (2006)
How Well Do We Understand and Evaluate Climate Change Feedback ProcessesJournal of Climate, 19
S. Hallegatte, A. Lahellec, J. Grandpeix (2006)
An Elicitation of the Dynamic Nature of Water Vapor Feedback in Climate Change Using a 1D Model.Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 63
J. Hansen, A. Lacis, D. Rind, G. Russell, P. Stone, I. Fung, R. Ruedy, J. Lerner (2013)
Climate Sensitivity: Analysis of Feedback Mechanisms, 29
G. Floquet
Sur les équations différentielles linéaires à coefficients périodiquesAnnales Scientifiques De L Ecole Normale Superieure, 12
A. Lahellec, J. Dufresne (2014)
A Formal Analysis of the Feedback Concept in Climate Models. Part II: Tangent Linear Systems in GCMsJournal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 71
J. Gregory, P. Forster (2008)
Transient climate response estimated from radiative forcing and observed temperature changeJournal of Geophysical Research, 113
A. Betts, M. Miller (1986)
A new convective adjustment scheme. Part II: Single column tests using GATE wave, BOMEX, ATEX and arctic air‐mass data setsQuarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 112
J. Gregory, M. Webb (2008)
Tropospheric Adjustment Induces a Cloud Component in CO2 ForcingJournal of Climate, 21
M. Grose, Jaclyn Brown, S. Narsey, Josephine Brown, B. Murphy, Clothilde Langlais, Alexander Gupta, A. Moise, Damien Irving (2014)
Assessment of the CMIP5 global climate model simulations of the western tropical Pacific climate system and comparison to CMIP3International Journal of Climatology, 34
H. Bode (1945)
Network analysis and feedback amplifier design
J. Gregory, W. Ingram, M. Palmer, G. Jones, P. Stott, R. Thorpe, J. Lowe, T. Johns, K. Williams (2004)
A new method for diagnosing radiative forcing and climate sensitivityGeophysical Research Letters, 31
M. Ghil (2001)
Hilbert problems for the geosciences in the 21st century – 20 years laterNonlinear Processes in Geophysics, 8
P. Chang, L. Ji, Bin Wang, Tim Li (1995)
Interactions between the Seasonal Cycle and El Niño-Southern Oscillation in an Intermediate Coupled Ocean-Atmosphere ModelJournal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 52
F. Hourdin, I. Musat, S. Bony, P. Braconnot, Francis Codron, J. Dufresne, L. Fairhead, M. Filiberti, P. Friedlingstein, J. Grandpeix, G. Krinner, P. Levan, Zhaoxin Li, F. Lott (2006)
The LMDZ4 general circulation model: climate performance and sensitivity to parametrized physics with emphasis on tropical convectionClimate Dynamics, 27
R. Colman, B. Mcavaney (2011)
On tropospheric adjustment to forcing and climate feedbacksClimate Dynamics, 36
R. Lindzen, Yong-Sang Choi (2010)
On the observational determination of climate sensitivity and its implicationsAsia-Pacific Journal of Atmospheric Sciences, 47
A. Lahellec, J. Dufresne (2013)
A Formal Analysis of the Feedback Concept in Climate Models. Part I: Exclusive and Inclusive Feedback Analyses*Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 70
A. Hall, S. Manabe (1999)
The Role of Water Vapor Feedback in Unperturbed Climate Variability and Global WarmingJournal of Climate, 12
F. Fairman (1979)
Introduction to dynamic systems: Theory, models and applicationsProceedings of the IEEE, 69
E. Chung, B. Soden, B. Sohn (2010)
Revisiting the determination of climate sensitivity from relationships between surface temperature and radiative fluxesGeophysical Research Letters, 37
K. Emanuel (1991)
A Scheme for Representing Cumulus Convection in Large-Scale ModelsJournal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 48
C. Strong, F. Jin, M. Ghil (1995)
Intraseasonal Oscillations in a Barotropic Model with Annual Cycle, and Their PredictabilityJournal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 52
T. Andrews, P. Forster (2008)
CO2 forcing induces semi‐direct effects with consequences for climate feedback interpretationsGeophysical Research Letters, 35
R. Lindzen, Yong-Sang Choi (2009)
On the determination of climate feedbacks from ERBE dataGeophysical Research Letters, 36
J. Dwyer, M. Biasutti, A. Sobel (2012)
Projected Changes in the Seasonal Cycle of Surface TemperatureJournal of Climate, 25
M. Cherkaoui, J. Dufresne, R. Fournier, J. Grandpeix, A. Lahellec (1996)
Monte Carlo Simulation of Radiation in Gases With a Narrow-Band Model and a Net-Exchange FormulationJournal of Heat Transfer-transactions of The Asme, 118
K. Trenberth (1999)
Atmospheric moisture recycling : Role of advection and local evaporationJournal of Climate, 12
M. Chekroun, M. Ghil, Jean Roux, F. Varadi (2010)
AVERAGING OF TIME{PERIODIC SYSTEMS WITHOUT A SMALL PARAMETERDiscrete and Continuous Dynamical Systems, 14
This article introduces a new decomposition of climate feedback mechanisms based on their characteristic times. As the last of a series of three, it complements the first two parts by Lahellec and Dufresne to give a comprehensive review of climate feedbacks that will help to ensure consistency between practice and theory. In Parts I and II, analysis of the climate response to perturbations at the large spatial scales and time scales necessary to obtain linearity restricted the characterization to the slow components of the response. This part incorporates the fast mechanisms’ impact on the climate feedbacks, bringing the seasonal cycle into the analysis. Thanks to the Floquet theory, the authors could extend the formal framework of Parts I and II to incorporate the fast mechanisms. An illustration of the formal results with a simple 1D model highlights a clear distinction between the role of fast (intraseasonal) and slow (decadal) feedbacks, with an application to the water-cycle feedback of Part II. The same implementation of the Gâteaux difference in LMDZ, the GCM of LMD, as in Part II is used for comparing results with the authors’ toy model. This comparison essentially validates the Floquet decomposition obtained with the toy model: the fast component linked to precipitation is contributing negatively to the water-cycle feedback while the slow component is building up the positive feedback. The comparison also provides further insight on the sensitivity of models’ precipitation to climate warming.
Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences – American Meteorological Society
Published: Dec 12, 2014
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.