Multimodel Errors and Emergence Times in Climate Attribution Studies

Abstract

Abstract Global climate models, like any in silico numerical experiments, are affected by different types of bias. Uncertainty quantification remains a challenge in any climate detection and attribution analysis. A fundamental methodological question is to determine which statistical summaries, while bringing relevant signals, can be robust with respect to multimodel errors. In this paper, we propose a simple statistical framework that significantly improves signal detection in climate attribution studies. We show that the complex bias correction step can be entirely bypassed for models for which bias between the simulated and unobserved counterfactual worlds is the same as between the simulated and unobserved factual worlds. To illustrate our approach, we infer emergence times in precipitation from the CMIP5 and CMIP6 archives. The detected anthropogenic signal in yearly maxima of daily precipitation clearly emerges at the beginning of the twenty-first century. In addition, no CMIP model seems to outperform the others and a weighted linear combination of all improves the estimation of emergence times. Significance Statement We show that the bias in multimodel global climate simulations can be efficiently handled when the appropriate metric is chosen. This metric leads to an easy-to-implement statistical procedure based on a checkable assumption. This allows us to demonstrate that optimal convex combinations of CMIP outputs can improve the signal strength in finding emergence times. Our data analysis procedure is applied to yearly maximum of precipitation from CMIP5 and CMIP6 databases. The attribution of the anthropogenic forcing clearly emerges in extreme precipitation at the beginning of the twenty-first century.