
handle: 1959.4/unsworks_42081
Abstract Separating low-frequency internal variability of the climate system from the forced signal is essential to better understand anthropogenic climate change as well as internal climate variability. Here both synthetic time series and the historical simulations from phase 5 of CMIP (CMIP5) are used to examine several methods of performing this separation. Linear detrending, as is commonly used in studies of low-frequency climate variability, is found to introduce large biases in both amplitude and phase of the estimated internal variability. Using estimates of the forced signal obtained from ensembles of climate simulations can reduce these biases, particularly when the forced signal is scaled to match the historical time series of each ensemble member. These so-called scaling methods also provide estimates of model sensitivities to different types of external forcing. Applying the methods to observations of the Atlantic multidecadal oscillation leads to different estimates of the phase of this mode of variability in recent decades.
13 Climate Action, 550, anzsrc-for: 0405 Oceanography, anzsrc-for: 3702 Climate change science, 37 Earth Sciences, Bioengineering, anzsrc-for: 37 Earth Sciences, anzsrc-for: 3708 Oceanography, 551, anzsrc-for: 0401 Atmospheric Sciences, 3701 Atmospheric Sciences, 3708 Oceanography, anzsrc-for: 3701 Atmospheric Sciences, anzsrc-for: 0909 Geomatic Engineering
13 Climate Action, 550, anzsrc-for: 0405 Oceanography, anzsrc-for: 3702 Climate change science, 37 Earth Sciences, Bioengineering, anzsrc-for: 37 Earth Sciences, anzsrc-for: 3708 Oceanography, 551, anzsrc-for: 0401 Atmospheric Sciences, 3701 Atmospheric Sciences, 3708 Oceanography, anzsrc-for: 3701 Atmospheric Sciences, anzsrc-for: 0909 Geomatic Engineering
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 89 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
