Articles | Volume 16, issue 5
https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-1653-2022
© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-1653-2022
© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
05 May 2022
Research article |
| 05 May 2022
| 05 May 2022
Network connectivity between the winter Arctic Oscillation and summer sea ice in CMIP6 models and observations
William Gregory
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Centre for Polar Observation and Modelling, Earth Sciences, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK
Julienne Stroeve
Centre for Polar Observation and Modelling, Earth Sciences, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK
National Snow and Ice Data Center, Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, 80309-0449, USA
Centre for Earth Observation Science, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, R3T 2N2, Canada
Michel Tsamados
Centre for Polar Observation and Modelling, Earth Sciences, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK
Related authors
No articles found.
Lanqing Huang, Julienne Stroeve, Thomas Newman, Robbie Mallett, Rosemary Willatt, Lu Zhou, Malin Johansson, Carmen Nab, and Alicia Fallows
The Cryosphere, 20, 2825–2849, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-20-2825-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-20-2825-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Understanding snow depth on sea ice is key for measuring ice thickness, studying ecosystems, and modelling climate. Using snow and ice thickness measurements from Arctic and Antarctic campaigns, this study examines sub-kilometre-scale (<1 km²) snow depth variations and identifies the most suitable statistical models for different ice ages, thicknesses, and weather conditions. These results can improve sub-grid snow parameterisations in snow models and remote sensing algorithms.
Alistair Duffey, Walker Lee, Lauren Wheeler, Peter Irvine, Benjamin Wagman, Matthew Henry, Daniele Visioni, Michel Tsamados, and Douglas MacMartin
Earth Syst. Dynam., 17, 353–385, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-17-353-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-17-353-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Adding a layer of reflective particles high in the atmosphere is one suggested way of cooling the planet and reducing the impacts of climate change. This technique might be less logistically difficult in the high latitudes, because the material could be released at lower altitude there. Here, we use new simulations in three earth system models to assess how this form of intervention, High-Latitude Low-Altitude Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (HiLLA-SAI), would impact the global climate.
Rasmus Tage Tonboe, Vishnu Nandan, Marcus Huntemann, Julienne Stroeve, Randall Scharien, John Yackel, Lars Kaleschke, Hoyeon Shi, and Tânia Casal
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1440, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1440, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Scattering and absorption from air bubbles, voids, and brine pockets significantly affect radar and microwave radiometer measurements of sea ice and light propagation through sea ice. Here, we used a high-resolution dataset, collected during the 2019–20 MOSAiC expedition, of thin ice slices of various Arctic sea ice types to estimate the autocorrelation length and density of the inclusions. The data can be used to initialize sea ice scattering models and for understanding satellite data.
Wenxuan Liu, Ruibo Lei, Taoyong Jin, Heyang Sun, Michel Tsamados, Isolde A. Glissenaar, Jack Christopher Landy, and Yi Zhou
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-766, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-766, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
The thickness and surface shape of Arctic sea ice are difficult to measure accurately, especially in summer when melting occurs. We developed a new method that uses ICESat-2 photon data to map sea ice height throughout the year. By carefully filtering noise and using satellite images to help identify open water, we obtained more detailed and reliable ice heights and freeboards than existing products. The results better capture rough ice features and improve accuracy.
Julienne Stroeve, Rosemary Willatt, Madeleine Downie, Monojit Saha, Carmen Nab, Alicia Fallows, Clement Soriot, Robbie Mallett, Anton Komarov, Vishnu Nandan, Thomas Newman, and John Yackel
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-212, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-212, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
We evaluate polarimetry for snow depth retrieval on Arctic winter transport routes. Over landfast ice and tundra, traditional dual-frequency (Ku/Ka) methods often fail. We demonstrate that cross-polarization (VH) provides a more reliable marker for snow/ice and snow/ground interfaces. For lakes, we successfully resolve air, snow, and ice interfaces to retrieve snow and ice thickness simultaneously. These results establish a baseline for future polarimetric satellite missions.
Valentin Ludwig, Caroline Ribere, Sara Fleury, Christian Haas, Michel Tsamados, Mahmoud El Hajj, Jerome Bouffard, Michele Scagliola, Marion Bocquet, Eric de Boisseson, Vincent Boulenger, Guillaume Boutin, Laurence Connor, Léo Edel, Stefan Hendricks, Ferran Hernández Macià, Marcus Huntemann, Lars Kaleschke, Frank Kauker, Jack Landy, Tom Megain, Alek Petty, Till Soya Rasmussen, Mads Hvid Ribergaard, Robert Ricker, Axel Schweiger, Hoyeon Shi, Xiangshan Tian-Kunze, Donghui Yi, and Alessandro Di Bella
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-6201, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-6201, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Our paper compares Arctic sea-ice thickness datasets from models, reanalyses, satellite-only, and multi-product sources. We validate them against Beaufort Sea reference data, compare large-scale products, and analyse time series. Cross-product biases range from 0.2–0.4 m, RMSDs from 0.4–0.9 m, and correlations from 0.5–0.8. We find no 2010–2023 trend, but 1995–2023 thinning of ~ 0.5 m in November and ~ 0.3 m in March.
Jack C. Landy, Claude de Rijke-Thomas, Carmen Nab, Isobel Lawrence, Isolde A. Glissenaar, Robbie D. C. Mallett, Renée M. Fredensborg Hansen, Alek Petty, Michel Tsamados, Amy R. Macfarlane, and Anne Braakmann-Folgmann
The Cryosphere, 20, 183–208, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-20-183-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-20-183-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
In this study, we use three satellites to test the planned remote sensing approach of the upcoming mission Copernicus Polar Ice and Snow Topography Altimeter (CRISTAL) over sea ice and that its dual radars will accurately measure the heights of the top and base of snow sitting atop floating sea ice floes. Our results suggest that CRISTAL's dual radars will not necessarily measure the snow top and base under all conditions. We find that accurate height measurements depend more on surface roughness than on snow properties, as is commonly assumed.
Nicole A. Loeb, Alex Crawford, Brice Noël, and Julienne Stroeve
The Cryosphere, 19, 5403–5422, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-19-5403-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-19-5403-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We examine how extreme precipitation days affect the seasonal mass balance (SMB) of land ice in Greenland and the Eastern Canadian Arctic in historical and future simulations. Past extreme precipitation led to higher SMB with snowfall. Future extreme precipitation may lead to the loss of ice mass as more falls as rain rather than snow in some regions, such as southwestern Greenland. Across the region, extreme precipitation becomes more important to seasonal SMB in the future, warmer climate.
Vaishali Chaudhary, Julienne Stroeve, Vishnu Nandan, and Dustin Isleifson
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2851, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2851, 2025
Preprint archived
Short summary
Short summary
This study examines how changing weather is affecting sea ice near the Arctic community of Tuktoyaktuk in Canada. Using satellite images and weather records, we found that stronger winds from certain directions are causing the sea ice to break more often in winter. These changes pose risks for local people who depend on stable ice for travel and hunting. Our findings help understand how climate change is making Arctic ice less reliable and more dangerous.
Franck Eitel Kemgang Ghomsi, Muharrem Hilmi Erkoç, Roshin P. Raj, Atinç Pirti, Antonio Bonaduce, Babatunde J. Abiodun, and Julienne Stroeve
Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci., XLVIII-M-6-2025, 393–397, https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLVIII-M-6-2025-393-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLVIII-M-6-2025-393-2025, 2025
Elie René-Bazin, Michel Tsamados, Sabrina Sofea Binti Aliff Raziuddin, Joel Perez Ferrer, Tudor Suciu, Carmen Nab, Chamkaur Ghag, Harry Heorton, Rosemary Willatt, Jack Landy, Matthew Fox, and Thomas Bodin
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1163, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1163, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This paper introduces a new statistical approach to retrieve ice and snow depth over the Arctic Ocean, using satellite altimeters measurements. We demonstrate the ability of this method to compute efficiently the sea ice thickness and the snow depth over the Arctic, without major assumptions on the snow. In addition to the ice and snow depth, this approach is efficient to study the penetration of radar and laser pulses, paving the way for further research in satellite altimetry.
Monojit Saha, Julienne Stroeve, Dustin Isleifson, John Yackel, Vishnu Nandan, Jack Christopher Landy, and Hoi Ming Lam
The Cryosphere, 19, 325–346, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-19-325-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-19-325-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Snow on sea ice is vital for near-shore sea ice geophysical and biological processes. Past studies have measured snow depths using the satellite altimeters Cryosat-2 and ICESat-2 (Cryo2Ice), but estimating sea surface height from leadless landfast sea ice remains challenging. Snow depths from Cryo2Ice are compared to in situ data after adjusting for tides. Realistic snow depths are retrieved, but differences in roughness, satellite footprints, and snow geophysical properties are identified.
Caroline R. Holmes, Thomas J. Bracegirdle, Paul R. Holland, Julienne Stroeve, and Jeremy Wilkinson
The Cryosphere, 18, 5641–5652, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-5641-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-5641-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Until recently, satellite data showed an increase in Antarctic sea ice area since 1979, but climate models simulated a decrease over this period. This mismatch was one reason for low confidence in model projections of 21st-century sea ice loss. We show that following low Antarctic sea ice in 2022 and 2023, we can no longer conclude that modelled and observed trends differ. However, differences in the manner of the decline mean that model sea ice projections should still be viewed with caution.
Lu Zhou, Julienne Stroeve, Vishnu Nandan, Rosemary Willatt, Shiming Xu, Weixin Zhu, Sahra Kacimi, Stefanie Arndt, and Zifan Yang
The Cryosphere, 18, 4399–4434, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-4399-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-4399-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Snow over Antarctic sea ice, influenced by highly variable meteorological conditions and heavy snowfall, has a complex stratigraphy and profound impact on the microwave signature. We employ advanced radiation transfer models to analyse the effects of complex snow properties on brightness temperatures over the sea ice in the Southern Ocean. Great potential lies in the understanding of snow processes and the application to satellite retrievals.
Wiebke Margitta Kolbe, Rasmus T. Tonboe, and Julienne Stroeve
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 1247–1264, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-1247-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-1247-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Current satellite-based sea-ice climate data records (CDRs) usually begin in October 1978 with the first multichannel microwave radiometer data. Here, we present a sea ice dataset based on the single-channel Electrical Scanning Microwave Radiometer (ESMR) that operated from 1972-1977 onboard NASA’s Nimbus 5 satellite. The data were processed using modern methods and include uncertainty estimations in order to provide an important, easy-to-use reference period of good quality for current CDRs.
Alistair Duffey, Robbie Mallett, Peter J. Irvine, Michel Tsamados, and Julienne Stroeve
Earth Syst. Dynam., 14, 1165–1169, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-1165-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-1165-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The Arctic is warming several times faster than the rest of the planet. Here, we use climate model projections to quantify for the first time how this faster warming in the Arctic impacts the timing of crossing the 1.5 °C and 2 °C thresholds defined in the Paris Agreement. We show that under plausible emissions scenarios that fail to meet the Paris 1.5 °C target, a hypothetical world without faster warming in the Arctic would breach that 1.5 °C target around 5 years later.
Alexander Mchedlishvili, Christof Lüpkes, Alek Petty, Michel Tsamados, and Gunnar Spreen
The Cryosphere, 17, 4103–4131, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-4103-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-4103-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
In this study we looked at sea ice–atmosphere drag coefficients, quantities that help with characterizing the friction between the atmosphere and sea ice, and vice versa. Using ICESat-2, a laser altimeter that measures elevation differences by timing how long it takes for photons it sends out to return to itself, we could map the roughness, i.e., how uneven the surface is. From roughness we then estimate drag force, the frictional force between sea ice and the atmosphere, across the Arctic.
Vishnu Nandan, Rosemary Willatt, Robbie Mallett, Julienne Stroeve, Torsten Geldsetzer, Randall Scharien, Rasmus Tonboe, John Yackel, Jack Landy, David Clemens-Sewall, Arttu Jutila, David N. Wagner, Daniela Krampe, Marcus Huntemann, Mallik Mahmud, David Jensen, Thomas Newman, Stefan Hendricks, Gunnar Spreen, Amy Macfarlane, Martin Schneebeli, James Mead, Robert Ricker, Michael Gallagher, Claude Duguay, Ian Raphael, Chris Polashenski, Michel Tsamados, Ilkka Matero, and Mario Hoppmann
The Cryosphere, 17, 2211–2229, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-2211-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-2211-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We show that wind redistributes snow on Arctic sea ice, and Ka- and Ku-band radar measurements detect both newly deposited snow and buried snow layers that can affect the accuracy of snow depth estimates on sea ice. Radar, laser, meteorological, and snow data were collected during the MOSAiC expedition. With frequent occurrence of storms in the Arctic, our results show that
wind-redistributed snow needs to be accounted for to improve snow depth estimates on sea ice from satellite radars.
Younjoo J. Lee, Wieslaw Maslowski, John J. Cassano, Jaclyn Clement Kinney, Anthony P. Craig, Samy Kamal, Robert Osinski, Mark W. Seefeldt, Julienne Stroeve, and Hailong Wang
The Cryosphere, 17, 233–253, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-233-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-233-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
During 1979–2020, four winter polynyas occurred in December 1986 and February 2011, 2017, and 2018 north of Greenland. Instead of ice melting due to the anomalous warm air intrusion, the extreme wind forcing resulted in greater ice transport offshore. Based on the two ensemble runs, representing a 1980s thicker ice vs. a 2010s thinner ice, a dominant cause of these winter polynyas stems from internal variability of atmospheric forcing rather than from the forced response to a warming climate.
Julienne Stroeve, Vishnu Nandan, Rosemary Willatt, Ruzica Dadic, Philip Rostosky, Michael Gallagher, Robbie Mallett, Andrew Barrett, Stefan Hendricks, Rasmus Tonboe, Michelle McCrystall, Mark Serreze, Linda Thielke, Gunnar Spreen, Thomas Newman, John Yackel, Robert Ricker, Michel Tsamados, Amy Macfarlane, Henna-Reetta Hannula, and Martin Schneebeli
The Cryosphere, 16, 4223–4250, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-4223-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-4223-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Impacts of rain on snow (ROS) on satellite-retrieved sea ice variables remain to be fully understood. This study evaluates the impacts of ROS over sea ice on active and passive microwave data collected during the 2019–20 MOSAiC expedition. Rainfall and subsequent refreezing of the snowpack significantly altered emitted and backscattered radar energy, laying important groundwork for understanding their impacts on operational satellite retrievals of various sea ice geophysical variables.
David N. Wagner, Matthew D. Shupe, Christopher Cox, Ola G. Persson, Taneil Uttal, Markus M. Frey, Amélie Kirchgaessner, Martin Schneebeli, Matthias Jaggi, Amy R. Macfarlane, Polona Itkin, Stefanie Arndt, Stefan Hendricks, Daniela Krampe, Marcel Nicolaus, Robert Ricker, Julia Regnery, Nikolai Kolabutin, Egor Shimanshuck, Marc Oggier, Ian Raphael, Julienne Stroeve, and Michael Lehning
The Cryosphere, 16, 2373–2402, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-2373-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-2373-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Based on measurements of the snow cover over sea ice and atmospheric measurements, we estimate snowfall and snow accumulation for the MOSAiC ice floe, between November 2019 and May 2020. For this period, we estimate 98–114 mm of precipitation. We suggest that about 34 mm of snow water equivalent accumulated until the end of April 2020 and that at least about 50 % of the precipitated snow was eroded or sublimated. Further, we suggest explanations for potential snowfall overestimation.
Florent Garnier, Sara Fleury, Gilles Garric, Jérôme Bouffard, Michel Tsamados, Antoine Laforge, Marion Bocquet, Renée Mie Fredensborg Hansen, and Frédérique Remy
The Cryosphere, 15, 5483–5512, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-5483-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-5483-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Snow depth data are essential to monitor the impacts of climate change on sea ice volume variations and their impacts on the climate system. For that purpose, we present and assess the altimetric snow depth product, computed in both hemispheres from CryoSat-2 and SARAL satellite data. The use of these data instead of the common climatology reduces the sea ice thickness by about 30 cm over the 2013–2019 period. These data are also crucial to argue for the launch of the CRISTAL satellite mission.
Isolde A. Glissenaar, Jack C. Landy, Alek A. Petty, Nathan T. Kurtz, and Julienne C. Stroeve
The Cryosphere, 15, 4909–4927, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-4909-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-4909-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Scientists can estimate sea ice thickness using satellites that measure surface height. To determine the sea ice thickness, we also need to know the snow depth and density. This paper shows that the chosen snow depth product has a considerable impact on the findings of sea ice thickness state and trends in Baffin Bay, showing mean thinning with some snow depth products and mean thickening with others. This shows that it is important to better understand and monitor snow depth on sea ice.
Marcel Kleinherenbrink, Anton Korosov, Thomas Newman, Andreas Theodosiou, Alexander S. Komarov, Yuanhao Li, Gert Mulder, Pierre Rampal, Julienne Stroeve, and Paco Lopez-Dekker
The Cryosphere, 15, 3101–3118, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-3101-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-3101-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Harmony is one of the Earth Explorer 10 candidates that has the chance of being selected for launch in 2028. The mission consists of two satellites that fly in formation with Sentinel-1D, which carries a side-looking radar system. By receiving Sentinel-1's signals reflected from the surface, Harmony is able to observe instantaneous elevation and two-dimensional velocity at the surface. As such, Harmony's data allow the retrieval of sea-ice drift and wave spectra in sea-ice-covered regions.
Cited articles
Abe, S. and Suzuki, N.: Complex-network description of seismicity, Nonlin. Processes Geophys., 13, 145–150, https://doi.org/10.5194/npg-13-145-2006, 2006. a
Albert, R. and Barabási, A.-L.: Statistical mechanics of complex networks,
Rev. Mod. Phys., 74, 47, https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.74.47, 2002. a
Allard, R. A., Farrell, S. L., Hebert, D. A., Johnston, W. F., Li, L., Kurtz,
N. T., Phelps, M. W., Posey, P. G., Tilling, R., Ridout, A., and Wallcraft, A. J.:
Utilizing CryoSat-2 sea ice thickness to initialize a coupled ice-ocean
modeling system, Adv. Space Res., 62, 1265–1280,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2017.12.030, 2018. a
Årthun, M., Onarheim, I. H., Dörr, J., and Eldevik, T.: The seasonal
and regional transition to an ice-free Arctic, Geophys. Res. Lett.,
48, e2020GL090825, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL090825, 2021. a
Balan-Sarojini, B., Tietsche, S., Mayer, M., Balmaseda, M., Zuo, H., de Rosnay, P., Stockdale, T., and Vitart, F.: Year-round impact of winter sea ice thickness observations on seasonal forecasts, The Cryosphere, 15, 325–344, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-325-2021, 2021. a
Blockley, E. W. and Peterson, K. A.: Improving Met Office seasonal predictions of Arctic sea ice using assimilation of CryoSat-2 thickness, The Cryosphere, 12, 3419–3438, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-12-3419-2018, 2018. a
Boccaletti, S., Latora, V., Moreno, Y., Chavez, M., and Hwang, D.-U.: Complex
networks: Structure and dynamics, Phys. Rep., 424, 175–308,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2005.10.009, 2006. a
Boccaletti, S., Bianconi, G., Criado, R., Del Genio, C. I.,
Gómez-Gardenes, J., Romance, M., Sendina-Nadal, I., Wang, Z., and
Zanin, M.: The structure and dynamics of multilayer networks, Phys.
Rep., 544, 1–122, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2014.07.001, 2014. a
Boers, N., Bookhagen, B., Barbosa, H. M. J., Marwan, N., Kurths, J., and
Marengo, J. A.: Prediction of extreme floods in the eastern Central Andes
based on a complex networks approach, Nat. Commun., 5, 5199,
https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms6199, 2014. a
Bonan, D. and Blanchard-Wrigglesworth, E.: Nonstationary teleconnection between
the Pacific Ocean and Arctic sea ice, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47,
e2019GL085666, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL085666, 2020. a
Bonan, D. B., Bushuk, M., and Winton, M.: A spring barrier for regional
predictions of summer Arctic sea ice, Geophys. Res. Lett., 46,
5937–5947, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL082947, 2019. a
Bushuk, M. and Giannakis, D.: The seasonality and interannual variability of
Arctic sea ice reemergence, J. Climate, 30, 4657–4676,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0549.1, 2017. a, b
Bushuk, M., Msadek, R., Winton, M., Vecchi, G. A., Gudgel, R., Rosati, A., and
Yang, X.: Skillful regional prediction of Arctic sea ice on seasonal
timescales, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 4953–4964,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL073155, 2017. a
Bushuk, M., Msadek, R., Winton, M., Vecchi, G., Yang, X., Rosati, A., and
Gudgel, R.: Regional Arctic sea–ice prediction: Potential versus operational
seasonal forecast skill, Clim. Dynam., 52, 2721–2743,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-018-4288-y, 2019. a, b
Bushuk, M., Winton, M., Bonan, D. B., Blanchard-Wrigglesworth, E., and
Delworth, T. L.: A mechanism for the Arctic sea ice spring predictability
barrier, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2020GL088335,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL088335, 2020. a
Cattiaux, J. and Cassou, C.: Opposite CMIP3/CMIP5 trends in the wintertime
Northern Annular Mode explained by combined local sea ice and remote tropical
influences, Geophys. Res. Lett., 40, 3682–3687,
https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50643, 2013. a
Cavalieri, D. J., Parkinson, C. L., Gloersen, P., and Zwally, H. J.: Sea Ice Concentrations from Nimbus-7 SMMR and DMSP SSM/I-SSMIS Passive Microwave Data, Version 1, NASA National Snow and Ice Data Center Distributed Active Archive Center, Boulder, Colorado USA [data set], https://doi.org/10.5067/8GQ8LZQVL0VL, 1996. a, b
Chevallier, M. and Salas-Mélia, D.: The role of sea ice thickness
distribution in the Arctic sea ice potential predictability: A diagnostic
approach with a coupled GCM, J. Climate, 25, 3025–3038,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00209.1, 2012. a
Cohen, J., Screen, J. A., Furtado, J. C., Barlow, M., Whittleston, D., Coumou,
D., Francis, J., Dethloff, K., Entekhabi, D., Overland, J., and Jones, J.: Recent
Arctic amplification and extreme mid-latitude weather, Nat. Geosci., 7,
627–637, https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2234, 2014. a
Cohen, J., Zhang, X., Francis, J., Jung, T., Kwok, R., Overland, J., Ballinger,
T., Bhatt, U., Chen, H., Coumou, D., Feldstein, S., Gu, H., Handorf, D., Henderson, G., Ionita, M., Kretschmer, M., Laliberte, F., Lee, S., Linderholm, H. W., Maslowski, W., Peings, Y., Pfeiffer, K., Rigor, I., Semmler, T., Stroeve, J., Taylor, P. C., Vavrus, S., Vihma, T., Wang, S., Wendisch, M., Wu, Y., and Yoon, J.: Divergent consensuses on Arctic
amplification influence on midlatitude severe winter weather, Nat. Clim.
Change, 10, 20–29, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0662-y, 2020. a
Cohen, R. and Havlin, S.: Complex networks: structure, robustness and function, 1st edn.,
Cambridge University Press, ISBN (Hardback) 978-0-521-84156-6,
ISBN (Online) 9780511780356,
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511780356, 2010. a
Collow, T. W., Wang, W., Kumar, A., and Zhang, J.: Improving Arctic sea ice
prediction using PIOMAS initial sea ice thickness in a coupled
ocean–atmosphere model, Mon. Weather Rev., 143, 4618–4630,
https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-15-0097.1, 2015. a
Comiso, J.: Bootstrap Sea Ice Concentrations from Nimbus-7 SMMR and DMSP SSM/I-SSMIS, Version 3, NASA National Snow and Ice Data Center Distributed Active Archive Center, Boulder, Colorado USA [data set], https://doi.org/10.5067/7Q8HCCWS4I0R,
2017. a, b
Comiso, J. C., Meier, W. N., and Gersten, R.: Variability and trends in the
Arctic Sea ice cover: Results from different techniques, J.
Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 122, 6883–6900, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JC012768,
2017. a
Crawford, A. D., Horvath, S., Stroeve, J., Balaji, R., and Serreze, M. C.:
Modulation of sea ice melt onset and retreat in the Laptev Sea by the timing
of snow retreat in the West Siberian Plain, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 123, 8691–8707, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JD028697, 2018. a
Day, J., Tietsche, S., and Hawkins, E.: Pan-Arctic and regional sea ice
predictability: Initialization month dependence, J. Climate, 27,
4371–4390, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-13-00614.1, 2014. a, b
delEtoile, J. and Adeli, H.: Graph theory and brain connectivity in
Alzheimer’s disease, Neuroscientist, 23, 616–626,
https://doi.org/10.1177/1073858417702621, 2017. a
Deser, C., Walsh, J. E., and Timlin, M. S.: Arctic sea ice variability in the
context of recent atmospheric circulation trends, J. Climate, 13,
617–633, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(2000)013<0617:ASIVIT>2.0.CO;2, 2000. a
Dijkstra, H. A., Hernández-García, E., Masoller, C., and Barreiro, M.:
Networks in Climate, 1st edn., Cambridge University Press, ISBN (Hardback) 9781107111233, ISBN (Online) 9781316275757,
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316275757,
2019. a
Doblas-Reyes, F. J., García-Serrano, J., Lienert, F., Biescas, A. P., and
Rodrigues, L. R.: Seasonal climate predictability and forecasting: status and
prospects, WIRES Clim. Change, 4, 245–268,
https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.217, 2013. a
Donges, J. F., Zou, Y., Marwan, N., and Kurths, J.: Complex networks in
climate dynamics: Comparing linear and nonlinear network construction
methods, Eur. Phys. J.-Spec. Top., 174, 157–179,
https://doi.org/10.1140/epjst/e2009-01098-2, 2009. a, b
Donges, J. F., Petrova, I., Loew, A., Marwan, N., and Kurths, J.: How complex
climate networks complement eigen techniques for the statistical analysis of
climatological data, Clim. Dynam., 45, 2407–2424,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-015-2479-3, 2015. a, b
EUMETSAT Ocean and Sea Ice Satellite Application Facility: Global sea ice concentration interim climate data record 2016–onwards (v2.0, 2017), OSI-430-b, OSI SAF FTP server/EUMETSAT Data Center [data set], https://osi-saf.eumetsat.int/products/osi-430-b-complementing-osi-450, (last access: 1 June 2021), 2016. a
Eyring, V., Bony, S., Meehl, G. A., Senior, C. A., Stevens, B., Stouffer, R. J., and Taylor, K. E.: Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) experimental design and organization, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 1937–1958, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1937-2016, 2016. a
Fountalis, I., Bracco, A., and Dovrolis, C.: Spatio-temporal network analysis
for studying climate patterns, Clim. Dynam., 42, 879–899,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-013-1729-5, 2014. a, b, c
Fountalis, I., Bracco, A., and Dovrolis, C.: ENSO in CMIP5 simulations: network
connectivity from the recent past to the twenty-third century, Clim.
Dynam., 45, 511–538, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-014-2412-1, 2015. a, b, c
Francis, J. A., Chan, W., Leathers, D. J., Miller, J. R., and Veron, D. E.:
Winter Northern Hemisphere weather patterns remember summer Arctic sea-ice
extent, Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L07503, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL037274, 2009. a
Fritz, M., Vonk, J. E., and Lantuit, H.: Collapsing arctic coastlines, Nat.
Clim. Change, 7, 6–7, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3188, 2017. a
Gidden, M. J., Riahi, K., Smith, S. J., Fujimori, S., Luderer, G., Kriegler, E., van Vuuren, D. P., van den Berg, M., Feng, L., Klein, D., Calvin, K., Doelman, J. C., Frank, S., Fricko, O., Harmsen, M., Hasegawa, T., Havlik, P., Hilaire, J., Hoesly, R., Horing, J., Popp, A., Stehfest, E., and Takahashi, K.: Global emissions pathways under different socioeconomic scenarios for use in CMIP6: a dataset of harmonized emissions trajectories through the end of the century, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 1443–1475, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-1443-2019, 2019. a
Giesse, C., Notz, D., and Baehr, J.: On the origin of discrepancies between
observed and simulated memory of Arctic sea ice, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 48, e2020GL091784, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL091784, 2021. a
Gong, H., Wang, L., Chen, W., Chen, X., and Nath, D.: Biases of the wintertime
Arctic Oscillation in CMIP5 models, Environ. Res. Lett., 12,
014001, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/12/1/014001, 2016. a, b
Gong, H., Wang, L., Chen, W., Wu, R., Zhou, W., Liu, L., Nath, D., and Lan, X.:
Diversity of the wintertime Arctic Oscillation pattern among CMIP5 models:
Role of the stratospheric polar vortex, J. Climate, 32, 5235–5250,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0603.1, 2019. a
Graham, R. M., Cohen, L., Ritzhaupt, N., Segger, B., Graversen, R. G., Rinke,
A., Walden, V. P., Granskog, M. A., and Hudson, S. R.: Evaluation of six
atmospheric reanalyses over Arctic sea ice from winter to early summer,
J. Climate, 32, 4121–4143, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0643.1, 2019. a
Gregory, W.: William-gregory/CMIP6: Accompanying code for: “Network connectivity between the winter Arctic Oscillation and summer sea ice in CMIP6 models and observations” (v1.0), Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6514306, 2022. a, b
Gregory, W., Tsamados, M., Stroeve, J., and Sollich, P.: Regional September Sea
Ice Forecasting with Complex Networks and Gaussian Processes, Weather
Forecast., 35, 793–806, https://doi.org/10.1175/WAF-D-19-0107.1, 2020. a, b, c, d
Hawkins, E. and Sutton, R.: The potential to narrow uncertainty in regional
climate predictions, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 90,
1095–1108, https://doi.org/10.1175/2009BAMS2607.1, 2009. a
Hersbach, H., Bell, B., Berrisford, P., Biavati, G., Horányi, A., Muñoz Sabater, J., Nicolas, J., Peubey, C., Radu, R., Rozum, I., Schepers, D., Simmons, A., Soci, C., Dee, D., and Thépaut, J.-N.: ERA5 monthly averaged data on single levels from 1979 to present, Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) Climate Data Store (CDS) [data set], https://doi.org/10.24381/cds.f17050d7, 2019. a, b
Holland, M. M., Bailey, D. A., and Vavrus, S.: Inherent sea ice predictability
in the rapidly changing Arctic environment of the Community Climate System
Model, version 3, Clim. Dynam., 36, 1239–1253,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-010-0792-4, 2011. a
Hubert, L. and Arabie, P.: Comparing partitions, J. Classif., 2,
193–218, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01908075, 1985. a, b, c
Hurrell, J. W., Kushnir, Y., Ottersen, G., and Visbeck, M.: An overview of the
North Atlantic oscillation, in: Geophysical Monograph Series, Volume 134, 1–35, https://doi.org/10.1029/134GM01, 2003. a
Jahn, A.: Reduced probability of ice-free summers for 1.5 ∘C compared to 2 ∘C
warming, Nat. Clim. Change, 8, 409–413, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0127-8,
2018. a
Kapsch, M.-L., Graversen, R. G., and Tjernström, M.: Springtime atmospheric
energy transport and the control of Arctic summer sea-ice extent, Nat.
Clim. Change, 3, 744–748, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1884, 2013. a
Kay, J. E., Deser, C., Phillips, A., Mai, A., Hannay, C., Strand, G.,
Arblaster, J. M., Bates, S., Danabasoglu, G., Edwards, J., Holland, M., Kushner, P., Lamarque, J.-F., Lawrence, D., Lindsay, K., Middleton, A., Munoz, E., Neale, R., Oleson, K., Polvani, L., and Vertenstein, M.: The
Community Earth System Model (CESM) large ensemble project: A community
resource for studying climate change in the presence of internal climate
variability, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 96, 1333–1349,
https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00255.1, 2015. a
Kwok, R.: Arctic sea ice thickness, volume, and multiyear ice coverage: losses
and coupled variability (1958–2018), Environ. Res. Lett., 13,
105005, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aae3ec, 2018. a
Larsen, J. N., Schweitzer, P., Abass, K., Doloisio, N., Gartler, S.,
Ingeman-Nielsen, T., Ingimundarson, J. H., Jungsberg, L., Meyer, A., Rautio,
A., Scheer, J., Timlin, U., Vanderlinden, J.-P., and Vullierme, M.: Thawing permafrost in arctic coastal communities: A framework for
studying risks from climate change, Sustainability, 13, 2651,
https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052651, 2021. a
Lavergne, T., Sørensen, A. M., Kern, S., Tonboe, R., Notz, D., Aaboe, S., Bell, L., Dybkjær, G., Eastwood, S., Gabarro, C., Heygster, G., Killie, M. A., Brandt Kreiner, M., Lavelle, J., Saldo, R., Sandven, S., and Pedersen, L. T.: Version 2 of the EUMETSAT OSI SAF and ESA CCI sea-ice concentration climate data records, The Cryosphere, 13, 49–78, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-49-2019, 2019. a
Malik, N., Bookhagen, B., Marwan, N., and Kurths, J.: Analysis of spatial and
temporal extreme monsoonal rainfall over South Asia using complex networks,
Clim. Dynam., 39, 971–987, 2012. a
Mallett, R., Stroeve, J., Cornish, S., Crawford, A., Lukovich, J., Serreze, M.,
Barrett, A., Meier, W., Heorton, H., and Tsamados, M.: Record winter winds in
2020/21 drove exceptional Arctic sea ice transport, Commun. Earth
Environ., 2, 149, https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-021-00221-8, 2021. a
Maslanik, J., Fowler, C., Stroeve, J., Drobot, S., Zwally, J., Yi, D., and
Emery, W.: A younger, thinner Arctic ice cover: Increased potential for
rapid, extensive sea-ice loss, Geophys. Res. Lett., 34, L24501,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GL032043, 2007. a
Maslanik, J. A., Serreze, M. C., and Barry, R. G.: Recent decreases in Arctic
summer ice cover and linkages to atmospheric circulation anomalies,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 23, 1677–1680, https://doi.org/10.1029/96GL01426, 1996. a
Massonnet, F., Vancoppenolle, M., Goosse, H., Docquier, D., Fichefet, T., and
Blanchard-Wrigglesworth, E.: Arctic sea-ice change tied to its mean state
through thermodynamic processes, Nat. Clim. Change, 8, 599–603,
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0204-z, 2018. a
Matsumura, S., Zhang, X., and Yamazaki, K.: Summer Arctic atmospheric
circulation response to spring Eurasian snow cover and its possible linkage
to accelerated sea ice decrease, J. Climate, 27, 6551–6558,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-13-00549.1, 2014. a
Miller, R., Schmidt, G., and Shindell, D.: Forced annular variations in the
20th century intergovernmental panel on climate change fourth assessment
report models, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 111, D18101,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006323, 2006. a
Mioduszewski, J. R., Vavrus, S., Wang, M., Holland, M., and Landrum, L.: Past and future interannual variability in Arctic sea ice in coupled climate models, The Cryosphere, 13, 113–124, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-113-2019, 2019. a
Morabito, F. C., Campolo, M., Labate, D., Morabito, G., Bonanno, L., Bramanti,
A., De Salvo, S., Marra, A., and Bramanti, P.: A longitudinal EEG study of
Alzheimer's disease progression based on a complex network approach,
Int. J. Neural Syst., 25, 1550005,
https://doi.org/10.1142/S0129065715500057, 2015. a
Newman, M. E.: The structure and function of complex networks, SIAM Rev., 45,
167–256, https://doi.org/10.1137/S003614450342480, 2003. a
Notz, D.: How well must climate models agree with observations?, Philosophical
Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering
Sciences, 373, 20140164, https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2014.0164, 2015. a
Notz, D. and SIMIP-Community: Arctic sea ice in CMIP6, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 47, e2019GL086749, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL086749,
2020. a
Notz, D. and Stroeve, J.: Observed Arctic sea-ice loss directly follows
anthropogenic CO2 emission, Science, 354, 747–750,
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aag2345, 2016. a
Olonscheck, D., Mauritsen, T., and Notz, D.: Arctic sea-ice variability is
primarily driven by atmospheric temperature fluctuations, Nat. Geosci.,
12, 430–434, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-019-0363-1, 2019. a
Onarheim, I. H., Eldevik, T., Smedsrud, L. H., and Stroeve, J. C.: Seasonal and
regional manifestation of Arctic sea ice loss, J. Climate, 31,
4917–4932, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0427.1, 2018. a
Ono, J., Komuro, Y., and Tatebe, H.: Impact of sea-ice thickness initialized in
April on Arctic sea-ice extent predictability with the MIROC climate model,
Ann. Glaciol., 61, 97–105, https://doi.org/10.1017/aog.2020.13, 2020. a
OSI-SAF: Global Sea Ice Concentration Climate Data Record v2.0 – Multimission,
EUMETSAT SAF on Ocean and Sea Ice [data set], https://doi.org/10.15770/EUM_SAF_OSI_0008, 2017. a, b
Overland, J. E., Francis, J. A., Hanna, E., and Wang, M.: The recent shift in
early summer Arctic atmospheric circulation, Geophys. Res. Lett.,
39, L19804, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL053268, 2012. a
Park, H.-S., Stewart, A. L., and Son, J.-H.: Dynamic and thermodynamic impacts
of the winter Arctic Oscillation on summer sea ice extent, J.
Climate, 31, 1483–1497, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0067.1, 2018. a, b
Polar Science Center: PIOMAS Variables on Model Grid, Polar Science Center [data set], http://psc.apl.uw.edu/research/projects/arctic-sea-ice-volume-anomaly/data/model_grid, last access: 2 March 2021. a
Rand, W. M.: Objective criteria for the evaluation of clustering methods,
J. Am. Stat. Assoc., 66, 846–850,
https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1971.10482356, 1971. a, b
Ricker, R., Girard-Ardhuin, F., Krumpen, T., and Lique, C.: Satellite-derived sea ice export and its impact on Arctic ice mass balance, The Cryosphere, 12, 3017–3032, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-12-3017-2018, 2018. a
Rigor, I. G., Wallace, J. M., and Colony, R. L.: Response of sea ice to the
Arctic Oscillation, J. Climate, 15, 2648–2663,
https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(2002)015<2648:ROSITT>2.0.CO;2, 2002. a, b
Runge, J., Nowack, P., Kretschmer, M., Flaxman, S., and Sejdinovic, D.:
Detecting and quantifying causal associations in large nonlinear time series
datasets, Science Advances, 5, eaau4996, https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aau4996, 2019. a, b
Sakshaug, E., Bjørge, A., Gulliksen, B., Loeng, H., and Mehlum, F.:
Structure, biomass distribution, and energetics of the pelagic ecosystem in
the Barents Sea: a synopsis, Polar Biol., 14, 405–411,
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00240261, 1994. a
Schröder, D., Feltham, D. L., Flocco, D., and Tsamados, M.: September
Arctic sea-ice minimum predicted by spring melt-pond fraction, Nat. Clim.
Change, 4, 353–357, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2203, 2014. a
Schröder, D., Feltham, D. L., Tsamados, M., Ridout, A., and Tilling, R.: New insight from CryoSat-2 sea ice thickness for sea ice modelling, The Cryosphere, 13, 125–139, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-125-2019, 2019. a
Schweiger, A., Lindsay, R., Zhang, J., Steele, M., Stern, H., and Kwok, R.:
Uncertainty in modeled Arctic sea ice volume, J. Geophys.
Res.-Oceans, 116, C00D06, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JC007084, 2011. a
Serreze, M. C., Maslanik, J. A., Key, J. R., Kokaly, R. F., and Robinson,
D. A.: Diagnosis of the record minimum in Arctic sea ice area during 1990 and
associated snow cover extremes, Geophys. Res. Lett., 22, 2183–2186,
https://doi.org/10.1029/95GL02068, 1995. a
Steinley, D.: Properties of the Hubert-Arable Adjusted Rand Index,
Psychol. Methods, 9, 386–396, https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.9.3.386, 2004. a
Stirling, I.: The importance of polynyas, ice edges, and leads to marine
mammals and birds, J. Marine Syst., 10, 9–21,
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0924-7963(96)00054-1, 1997. a
Stroeve, J. and Notz, D.: Changing state of Arctic sea ice across all seasons,
Environ. Res. Lett., 13, 103001, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aade56, 2018. a, b
Stroeve, J., Holland, M. M., Meier, W., Scambos, T., and Serreze, M.: Arctic
sea ice decline: Faster than forecast, Geophys. Res. Lett., 34, L09501,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GL029703, 2007. a
Stroeve, J., Barrett, A., Serreze, M., and Schweiger, A.: Using records from submarine, aircraft and satellites to evaluate climate model simulations of Arctic sea ice thickness, The Cryosphere, 8, 1839–1854, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-8-1839-2014, 2014. a, b, c
Stroeve, J., Vancoppenolle, M., Veyssiere, G., Lebrun, M., Castellani, G.,
Babin, M., Karcher, M., Landy, J., Liston, G. E., and Wilkinson, J.: A
multi-sensor and modeling approach for mapping light under sea ice during the
ice-growth season, Frontiers in Marine Science, 7, 592337,
https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2020.592337, 2021. a
Thompson, D. W. and Wallace, J. M.: The Arctic Oscillation signature in the
wintertime geopotential height and temperature fields, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 25, 1297–1300, https://doi.org/10.1029/98GL00950, 1998. a, b
Tietsche, S., Day, J. J., Guemas, V., Hurlin, W., Keeley, S., Matei, D.,
Msadek, R., Collins, M., and Hawkins, E.: Seasonal to interannual Arctic sea
ice predictability in current global climate models, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 41, 1035–1043, https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GL058755, 2014. a
Tsonis, A. A. and Roebber, P. J.: The architecture of the climate network,
Physica A, 333, 497–504,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2003.10.045, 2004. a, b, c
Tsonis, A. A., Swanson, K. L., and Roebber, P. J.: What do networks have to do
with climate?, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 87, 585–596,
https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-87-5-585, 2006. a
Venegas, S. A. and Mysak, L. A.: Is there a dominant timescale of natural
climate variability in the Arctic?, J. Climate, 13, 3412–3434,
https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(2000)013<3412:ITADTO>2.0.CO;2, 2000. a
Vinje, T.: Anomalies and trends of sea-ice extent and atmospheric circulation
in the Nordic Seas during the period 1864–1998, J. Climate, 14,
255–267, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(2001)014<0255:AATOSI>2.0.CO;2, 2001. a
Watts, M., Maslowski, W., Lee, Y. J., Kinney, J. C., and Osinski, R.: A spatial
evaluation of Arctic sea ice and regional limitations in CMIP6 historical
simulations, J. Climate, 34, 6399–6420,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-20-0491.1, 2021. a, b
Williams, J., Tremblay, B., Newton, R., and Allard, R.: Dynamic preconditioning
of the minimum September sea-ice extent, J. Climate, 29, 5879–5891,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0515.1, 2016. a, b
Zhang, J. and Rothrock, D.: Modeling global sea ice with a thickness and
enthalpy distribution model in generalized curvilinear coordinates, Mon.
Weather Rev., 131, 845–861,
https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(2003)131<0845:MGSIWA>2.0.CO;2, 2003. a
Zhang, R.: Mechanisms for low-frequency variability of summer Arctic sea ice
extent, P. Natl. Acad. Sci., 112, 4570–4575,
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1422296112, 2015. a
Zhou, C., Zemanová, L., Zamora-Lopez, G., Hilgetag, C. C., and Kurths, J.:
Structure–function relationship in complex brain networks expressed by
hierarchical synchronization, New J. Phys., 9, 178,
https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/9/6/178, 2007. a
Zuo, J.-Q., Li, W.-J., and Ren, H.-L.: Representation of the Arctic
Oscillation in the CMIP5 models, Advances in Climate Change Research, 4,
242–249, https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1248.2013.242, 2013. a, b
Short summary
This research was conducted to better understand how coupled climate models simulate one of the large-scale interactions between the atmosphere and Arctic sea ice that we see in observational data, the accurate representation of which is important for producing reliable forecasts of Arctic sea ice on seasonal to inter-annual timescales. With network theory, this work shows that models do not reflect this interaction well on average, which is likely due to regional biases in sea ice thickness.
This research was conducted to better understand how coupled climate models simulate one of the...
