English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

To demonstrate the importance of regional climate models over Japan, performance of the Meteorological Research Institute Regional Climate Model (MRI-RCM) was compared to the results of a super-high-resolution atmosphere general circulation model whose grid interval was 20 km (GCM20). The grid intervals (20 km) of the models are almost the same. Although both models reproduced the observed annual fluctuation of temperature adequately, the reproduced temperature of the GCM20 was somewhat lower than the observation, especially in winter. The temperature of the GCM20 has a negative bias of about -0.7°C, while the MRI-RCM has a negative bias of -0.1°C. Both models adequately reproduced the precipitation distribution during the winter monsoon. However, the precipitation of the GCM20 is less than the observation in early summer to autumn, while the MRI-RCM adequately reproduced precipitation during the same season. Therefore, for surface temperature and precipitation, the reproducibility of the MRI-RCM is generally better than that of the GCM20.

sola

Comparison of Climatic Reproducibility between a Super-High-Resolution Atmosphere General Circulation Model and a Meteorological Research Institute Regional Climate Model