% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{Stephan:863868,
      author       = {Stephan, Claudia Christine and Strube, Cornelia and Klocke,
                      Daniel and Ern, Manfred and Hoffmann, Lars and Preusse,
                      Peter and Schmidt, Hauke},
      title        = {{I}ntercomparison of gravity waves in global
                      convection-permitting models},
      journal      = {Journal of the atmospheric sciences},
      volume       = {76},
      number       = {9},
      issn         = {1520-0469},
      address      = {Boston, Mass.},
      publisher    = {American Meteorological Soc.},
      reportid     = {FZJ-2019-03839},
      pages        = {2739–2759},
      year         = {2019},
      abstract     = {Large uncertainties remain with respect to the
                      representation of atmospheric gravity waves (GWs) in General
                      Circulation Models (GCMs) with coarse grids. Insufficient
                      parameterizations result from a lack of observational
                      constraints on the parameters used in GW parameterizations
                      as well as from physical inconsistencies between
                      parameterizations and reality. For instance,
                      parameterizations make oversimplifying assumptions about the
                      generation and propagation of GWs. Increasing computational
                      capabilities now allow GCMs to run at grid spacings that are
                      sufficiently fine to resolve a major fraction of the GW
                      spectrum. This study presents the first intercomparison of
                      resolved GW pseudo-momentum fluxes (GWMFs) in global
                      convection-permitting simulations and those derived from
                      satellite observations. Six simulations of three different
                      GCMs are analyzed over the period of one month of August to
                      assess the sensitivity of GWMF to model formulation and
                      horizontal grid spacing. The simulations reproduce detailed
                      observed features of the global GWMF distribution, which can
                      be attributed to realistic GWs from convection, orography
                      and storm tracks. Yet, the GWMF magnitudes differ
                      substantially between simulations. Differences in the
                      strength of convection may help explain differences in the
                      GWMF between simulations of the same model in the summer low
                      latitudes where convection is the primary source. Across
                      models, there is no evidence for a systematic change with
                      resolution. Instead, GWMF is strongly affected by model
                      formulation. The results imply that validating the realism
                      of simulated GWs across the entire resolved spectrum will
                      remain a difficult challenge not least because of a lack of
                      appropriate observational data.},
      cin          = {IEK-7 / JSC},
      ddc          = {550},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)IEK-7-20101013 / I:(DE-Juel1)JSC-20090406},
      pnm          = {511 - Computational Science and Mathematical Methods
                      (POF3-511) / 244 - Composition and dynamics of the upper
                      troposphere and middle atmosphere (POF3-244)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-511 / G:(DE-HGF)POF3-244},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      UT           = {WOS:000482038400001},
      doi          = {10.1175/JAS-D-19-0040.1},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/863868},
}