Articles | Volume 20, issue 2
https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-20-853-2026
© Author(s) 2026. 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-20-853-2026
© Author(s) 2026. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
03 Feb 2026
Research article |
| 03 Feb 2026
| 03 Feb 2026
Enhancing sea ice knowledge through assimilation of sea ice thickness from ENVISAT and CS2SMOS
Nicholas Williams
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Center, Bergen, Norway
Yiguo Wang
Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Center, Bergen, Norway
François Counillon
Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Center, Bergen, Norway
Bjerknes Centre for Climate Research, Bergen, Norway
Related authors
Nicholas Williams, Yiguo Wang, and François Counillon
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-5920, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-5920, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for The Cryosphere (TC).
Short summary
Short summary
This study investigates whether assimilating sea ice thickness observations into a global climate model can improve reanalysis and seasonal prediction of the Antarctic sea ice. We found that assimilation of sea ice thickness improves the representation of sea ice variability, especially in western Antarctica. We also show that initialisation of predictions with sea ice thickness data assimilation can improve forecasts of sea ice concentration, extent and thickness in summer and autumn.
Nicholas Williams, Nicholas Byrne, Daniel Feltham, Peter Jan Van Leeuwen, Ross Bannister, David Schroeder, Andrew Ridout, and Lars Nerger
The Cryosphere, 17, 2509–2532, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-2509-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-2509-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Observations show that the Arctic sea ice cover has reduced over the last 40 years. This study uses ensemble-based data assimilation in a stand-alone sea ice model to investigate the impacts of assimilating three different kinds of sea ice observation, including the novel assimilation of sea ice thickness distribution. We show that assimilating ice thickness distribution has a positive impact on thickness and volume estimates within the ice pack, especially for very thick ice.
Nicholas Williams, Yiguo Wang, and François Counillon
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-5920, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-5920, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for The Cryosphere (TC).
Short summary
Short summary
This study investigates whether assimilating sea ice thickness observations into a global climate model can improve reanalysis and seasonal prediction of the Antarctic sea ice. We found that assimilation of sea ice thickness improves the representation of sea ice variability, especially in western Antarctica. We also show that initialisation of predictions with sea ice thickness data assimilation can improve forecasts of sea ice concentration, extent and thickness in summer and autumn.
Lilian Garcia-Oliva, Alberto Carrassi, and François Counillon
Nonlin. Processes Geophys., 32, 439–456, https://doi.org/10.5194/npg-32-439-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/npg-32-439-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We used a simple coupled model and a data assimilation method to find the correct initialisation for climate predictions. We aim to clarify when weakly or strongly coupled data assimilation (WCDA or SCDA) is best, depending on the system's dynamical characteristics (spatio-temporal) and data coverage. We found that WCDA is better in full data coverage. When we have a partially observed system, SCDA is better. This result depends on the temporal and spatial scale of the observed quantity.
Zikang He, Julien Brajard, Yiguo Wang, Xidong Wang, and Zheqi Shen
Nonlin. Processes Geophys., 32, 397–409, https://doi.org/10.5194/npg-32-397-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/npg-32-397-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Climate prediction is challenging due to systematic errors in traditional climate models. We addressed this by training a machine learning model to correct these errors and then integrating it with the traditional climate model to form an AI-physics hybrid model. Our study demonstrates that the hybrid model outperforms the original climate model on both short-term and long-term predictions of the atmosphere and ocean.
Yiguo Wang, François Counillon, Lea Svendsen, Ping-Gin Chiu, Noel Keenlyside, Patrick Laloyaux, Mariko Koseki, and Eric de Boisseson
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 17, 4185–4211, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-4185-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-4185-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
CoRea1860+ is a new climate dataset that reconstructs past climate conditions from 1860 to today. By using advanced modelling techniques and incorporating sea surface temperature observations, it provides a consistent picture of long-term climate variability. The dataset captures key ocean, sea ice, and atmosphere changes, helping scientists understand past climate changes and variability.
Zikang He, Yiguo Wang, Julien Brajard, Xidong Wang, and Zheqi Shen
The Cryosphere, 19, 3279–3293, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-19-3279-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-19-3279-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Declining Arctic sea ice presents both risks and opportunities for ecosystems, communities, and economic activities. To address prediction errors in dynamical models, we apply machine learning for error correction during prediction (online) or post-processing (offline). Our results show that both methods enhance sea ice predictions, particularly from September to January, with offline corrections outperforming online corrections.
Nil Irvalı, Ulysses S. Ninnemann, Are Olsen, Neil L. Rose, David J. R. Thornalley, Tor L. Mjell, and François Counillon
Geochronology, 6, 449–463, https://doi.org/10.5194/gchron-6-449-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gchron-6-449-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Marine sediments are excellent archives for reconstructing past changes in climate and ocean circulation. Yet, dating uncertainties, particularly during the 20th century, pose major challenges. Here we propose a novel chronostratigraphic approach that uses anthropogenic signals, such as the oceanic 13C Suess effect and spheroidal carbonaceous fly-ash particles, to reduce age model uncertainties in high-resolution marine archives over the 20th century.
Akhilesh Sivaraman Nair, François Counillon, and Noel Keenlyside
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2023-217, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2023-217, 2024
Publication in GMD not foreseen
Short summary
Short summary
This study demonstrates the importance of soil moisture (SM) in subseasonal-to-seasonal predictions. To addess this, we introduce the Norwegian Climate Prediction Model Land (NorCPM-Land), a land data assimilation system developed for the NorCPM. NorCPM-Land reduces error in SM by 10.5 % by assimilating satellite SM products. Enhanced land initialisation improves predictions up to a 3.5-month lead time for SM and a 1.5-month lead time for temperature and precipitation.
Nicholas Williams, Nicholas Byrne, Daniel Feltham, Peter Jan Van Leeuwen, Ross Bannister, David Schroeder, Andrew Ridout, and Lars Nerger
The Cryosphere, 17, 2509–2532, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-2509-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-2509-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Observations show that the Arctic sea ice cover has reduced over the last 40 years. This study uses ensemble-based data assimilation in a stand-alone sea ice model to investigate the impacts of assimilating three different kinds of sea ice observation, including the novel assimilation of sea ice thickness distribution. We show that assimilating ice thickness distribution has a positive impact on thickness and volume estimates within the ice pack, especially for very thick ice.
Ingo Bethke, Yiguo Wang, François Counillon, Noel Keenlyside, Madlen Kimmritz, Filippa Fransner, Annette Samuelsen, Helene Langehaug, Lea Svendsen, Ping-Gin Chiu, Leilane Passos, Mats Bentsen, Chuncheng Guo, Alok Gupta, Jerry Tjiputra, Alf Kirkevåg, Dirk Olivié, Øyvind Seland, Julie Solsvik Vågane, Yuanchao Fan, and Tor Eldevik
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 7073–7116, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-7073-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-7073-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The Norwegian Climate Prediction Model version 1 (NorCPM1) is a new research tool for performing climate reanalyses and seasonal-to-decadal climate predictions. It adds data assimilation capability to the Norwegian Earth System Model version 1 (NorESM1) and has contributed output to the Decadal Climate Prediction Project (DCPP) as part of the sixth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). We describe the system and evaluate its baseline, reanalysis and prediction performance.
Cited articles
Arruda, G. M. and Krutkowski, S.: Social impacts of climate change and resource development in the Arctic: Implications for Arctic governance, Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, 11, 277–288, 2017. a
Bentsen, M., Bethke, I., Debernard, J. B., Iversen, T., Kirkevåg, A., Seland, Ø., Drange, H., Roelandt, C., Seierstad, I. A., Hoose, C., and Kristjánsson, J. E.: The Norwegian Earth System Model, NorESM1-M – Part 1: Description and basic evaluation of the physical climate, Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 687–720, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-687-2013, 2013. a, b, c, d
Bethke, I., Wang, Y., Counillon, F., Keenlyside, N., Kimmritz, M., Fransner, F., Samuelsen, A., Langehaug, H., Svendsen, L., Chiu, P.-G., Passos, L., Bentsen, M., Guo, C., Gupta, A., Tjiputra, J., Kirkevåg, A., Olivié, D., Seland, Ø., Solsvik Vågane, J., Fan, Y., and Eldevik, T.: NorCPM1 and its contribution to CMIP6 DCPP, Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 7073–7116, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-7073-2021, 2021. a, b, c, d
Bitz, C., Holland, M., Weaver, A., and Eby, M.: Simulating the ice-thickness distribution in a coupled climate model, Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 106, 2441–2463, 2001. a
Bitz, C. M. and Lipscomb, W. H.: An energy-conserving thermodynamic model of sea ice, Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 104, 15669–15677, 1999. a
Blanchard-Wrigglesworth, E., Bitz, C., and Holland, M.: Influence of initial conditions and climate forcing on predicting Arctic sea ice, Geophysical Research Letters, 38, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GL048807, 2011b. a, b, c, d
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
Bocquet, M., Fleury, S., Rémy, F., and Piras, F.: Arctic and Antarctic sea ice thickness and volume changes from observations between 1994 and 2023, Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 129, e2023JC020848, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023JC020848, 2024. a
Briegleb, B. and Light, B.: A Delta-Eddington multiple scattering parameterization for solar radiation in the sea ice component of the Community Climate System Model, NCAR technical note, 1–108, 2007. a
Bushuk, M., Winton, M., Bonan, D. B., Blanchard-Wrigglesworth, E., and Delworth, T. L.: A mechanism for the Arctic sea ice spring predictability barrier, Geophysical Research Letters, 47, e2020GL088335, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL088335, 2020. a
Bushuk, M., Ali, S., Bailey, D. A., Bao, Q., Batté, L., Bhatt, U. S., Blanchard-Wrigglesworth, E., Blockley, E., Cawley, G., Chi, J., Counillon, F., Goulet Coulombe, P., Cullather, R. I., Diebold, F. X., Dirkson, A., Exarchou, E., Göbel, M., Gregory, W., Guemas, V., Hamilton, L., He, B., Horvath, S., Ionita, M., Kay, J. E., Kim, E., Kimura, N., Kondrashov, D., Labe, Z. M., Lee, W., Lee, Y. J., Li, C., Li, X., Lin, Y., Liu, Y.,Maslowski, W., Massonnet, F., Meier, W. N., Merryfield, W. J., Myint, H., Acosta Navarro, J. C., Petty, A., Qiao, F., Schröder, D., Schweiger, A., Shu, Q., Sigmond, M., Steele, M., Stroeve, J., Sun, N., Tietsche, S.,Tsamados, M., Wang, K., Wang, J., Wang, W., Wang, Y., Wang, Y., Williams, J., Yang, Q., Yuan, X., Zhang, J., and Zhang, Y.: Predicting September Arctic Sea Ice: A Multi-Model Seasonal Skill Comparison, Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 105, E1170–E1203, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-23-0163.1, 2024. a, b, c, d, e
Cardinali, C., Pezzulli, S., and Andersson, E.: Influence-matrix diagnostic of a data assimilation system, Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 130, 2767–2786, 2004. a
Carrassi, A., Weber, R., Guemas, V., Doblas-Reyes, F., Asif, M., and Volpi, D.: Full-field and anomaly initialization using a low-order climate model: a comparison and proposals for advanced formulations, Nonlinear Processes in Geophysics, 21, 521–537, 2014. a
Cavalieri, D. J. and Parkinson, C. L.: Arctic sea ice variability and trends, 1979–2010, The Cryosphere, 6, 881–889, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-6-881-2012, 2012. a
Chevallier, M., y Mélia, D. S., Voldoire, A., Déqué, M., and Garric, G.: Seasonal forecasts of the pan-Arctic sea ice extent using a GCM-based seasonal prediction system, Journal of Climate, 26, 6092–6104, 2013. 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, Nature Geoscience, 7, 627–637, 2014. a
Comiso, J.: Bootstrap Sea Ice Concentrations from Nimbus-7 SMMR and DMSP SSM/I-SSMIS, Version 3, Boulder, Colorado USA, NASA National Snow and Ice Data Center Distributed Active Archive Center, https://doi.org/10.5067/X5LG68MH013O, 2017. a
Comiso, J. C., Parkinson, C. L., Gersten, R., and Stock, L.: Accelerated decline in the Arctic sea ice cover, Geophysical Research Letters, 35, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GL031972, 2008. a
Counillon, F., Bethke, I., Keenlyside, N., Bentsen, M., Bertino, L., and Zheng, F.: Seasonal-to-decadal predictions with the ensemble Kalman filter and the Norwegian Earth System Model: a twin experiment, Tellus A, 66, 21074, https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusa.v66.21074, 2014. a
Counillon, F., Keenlyside, N., Bethke, I., Wang, Y., Billeau, S., Shen, M. L., and Bentsen, M.: Flow-dependent assimilation of sea surface temperature in isopycnal coordinates with the Norwegian Climate Prediction Model, Tellus A, 68, 32437, https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusa.v68.32437, 2016. a, b, c, d
Craig, A. P., Vertenstein, M., and Jacob, R.: A new flexible coupler for earth system modeling developed for CCSM4 and CESM1, The International Journal of High Performance Computing Applications, 26, 31–42, 2012. a
Dai, A., Luo, D., Song, M., and Liu, J.: Arctic amplification is caused by sea-ice loss under increasing CO2, Nature Communications, 10, 1–13, 2019. a
Descamps, S., Aars, J., Fuglei, E., Kovacs, K. M., Lydersen, C., Pavlova, O., Pedersen, Å. Ø., Ravolainen, V., and Strøm, H.: Climate change impacts on wildlife in a High Arctic archipelago–Svalbard, Norway, Global Change Biology, 23, 490–502, 2017. a
Evensen, G.: The ensemble Kalman filter: Theoretical formulation and practical implementation, Ocean Dynamics, 53, 343–367, 2003. a
Fritzner, S., Graversen, R., Christensen, K. H., Rostosky, P., and Wang, K.: Impact of assimilating sea ice concentration, sea ice thickness and snow depth in a coupled ocean–sea ice modelling system, The Cryosphere, 13, 491–509, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-491-2019, 2019. a
Gaspari, G. and Cohn, S. E.: Construction of correlation functions in two and three dimensions, Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 125, 723–757, 1999. a
Giesse, C., Notz, D., and Baehr, J.: On the origin of discrepancies between observed and simulated memory of Arctic sea ice, Geophysical Research Letters, 48, e2020GL091784, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL091784, 2021. a, b
Giles, K. A., Laxon, S. W., and Ridout, A. L.: Circumpolar thinning of Arctic sea ice following the 2007 record ice extent minimum, Geophysical Research Letters, 35, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GL035710, 2008. a
Good, S. A., Martin, M. J., and Rayner, N. A.: EN4: Quality controlled ocean temperature and salinity profiles and monthly objective analyses with uncertainty estimates, Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 118, 6704–6716, 2013. a
Gouretski, V. and Cheng, L.: Correction for systematic errors in the global dataset of temperature profiles from mechanical bathythermographs, Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 37, 841–855, 2020. a
Gouretski, V. and Reseghetti, F.: On depth and temperature biases in bathythermograph data: Development of a new correction scheme based on analysis of a global ocean database, Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers, 57, 812–833, 2010. a
Guemas, V., Chevallier, M., Déqué, M., Bellprat, O., and Doblas-Reyes, F.: Impact of sea ice initialization on sea ice and atmosphere prediction skill on seasonal timescales, Geophysical Research Letters, 43, 3889–3896, 2016. a
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, Climate Dynamics, 36, 1239–1253, 2011. a
Holland, M. M., Bailey, D. A., Briegleb, B. P., Light, B., and Hunke, E.: Improved sea ice shortwave radiation physics in CCSM4: The impact of melt ponds and aerosols on Arctic sea ice, Journal of Climate, 25, 1413–1430, 2012. a
Holland, M. M., Landrum, L., Bailey, D., and Vavrus, S.: Changing seasonal predictability of Arctic summer sea ice area in a warming climate, Journal of Climate, 32, 4963–4979, 2019. a
Huang, B., Liu, C., Banzon, V., Freeman, E., Graham, G., Hankins, B., Smith, T., and Zhang, H.-M.: Improvements of the daily optimum interpolation sea surface temperature (DOISST) version 2.1, Journal of Climate, 34, 2923–2939, 2021. a
Hunke, E., Lipscomb, W., Turner, A., Jeffery, N., and Elliott, S.: CICE: The Los Alamos sea ice model documentation and software user’s manual 1568 version 5.1, Tech. rep., Los Alamos National Laboratory, 2015 (code available at: https://github.com/CICE-Consortium/CICE-svn-trunk/tree/cice-5.1.2, last access: January 2025). a
Hunke, E. C. and Dukowicz, J. K.: An elastic–viscous–plastic model for sea ice dynamics, Journal of Physical Oceanography, 27, 1849–1867, 1997. a
Hurrell, J. W., Holland, M. M., Gent, P. R., Ghan, S., Kay, J. E., Kushner, P. J., Lamarque, J.-F., Large, W. G., Lawrence, D., Lindsay, K., Lipscomb, W. H., Long, M. C., Mahowald, N., Marsh, D. R., Neale, R. B., Rasch, P., Vavrus, S., Vertenstein, M., Bader, D., Collins, W. D., Hack, J. J., Kiehl, J., and Marshall, S.: The community earth system model: a framework for collaborative research, Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 94, 1339–1360, 2013. a
Ivanova, N., Pedersen, L. T., Tonboe, R. T., Kern, S., Heygster, G., Lavergne, T., Sørensen, A., Saldo, R., Dybkjær, G., Brucker, L., and Shokr, M.: Inter-comparison and evaluation of sea ice algorithms: towards further identification of challenges and optimal approach using passive microwave observations, The Cryosphere, 9, 1797–1817, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-9-1797-2015, 2015. a
Kirkevåg, A., Iversen, T., Seland, Ø., Hoose, C., Kristjánsson, J. E., Struthers, H., Ekman, A. M. L., Ghan, S., Griesfeller, J., Nilsson, E. D., and Schulz, M.: Aerosol–climate interactions in the Norwegian Earth System Model – NorESM1-M, Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 207–244, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-207-2013, 2013. a
Koenigk, T., König Beatty, C., Caian, M., Döscher, R., and Wyser, K.: Potential decadal predictability and its sensitivity to sea ice albedo parameterization in a global coupled model, Climate Dynamics, 38, 2389–2408, 2012. a
Krishfield, R. and Proshutinsky, A.: BGOS ULS data processing procedure, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Corpus ID: 130370100, https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:130370100 (last access: June 2025), 2006. a
Krishfield, R. A., Proshutinsky, A., Tateyama, K., Williams, W. J., Carmack, E. C., McLaughlin, F. A., and Timmermans, M.-L.: Deterioration of perennial sea ice in the Beaufort Gyre from 2003 to 2012 and its impact on the oceanic freshwater cycle, Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 119, 1271–1305, 2014. a
Kwok, R.: Arctic sea ice thickness, volume, and multiyear ice coverage: losses and coupled variability (1958–2018), Environmental Research Letters, 13, 105005, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aae3ec, 2018. a, b
Kwok, R., Zwally, H. J., and Yi, D.: ICESat observations of Arctic sea ice: A first look, Geophysical Research Letters, 31, https://doi.org/10.1029/2004GL020309, 2004. a
Laloyaux, P., Balmaseda, M., Dee, D., Mogensen, K., and Janssen, P.: A coupled data assimilation system for climate reanalysis, Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 142, 65–78, 2016. a
Lawrence, D. M., Oleson, K. W., Flanner, M. G., Thornton, P. E., Swenson, S. C., Lawrence, P. J., Zeng, X., Yang, Z.-L., Levis, S., Sakaguchi, K., Bonan, G. B., and Slater, A. G.: Parameterization improvements and functional and structural advances in version 4 of the Community Land Model, Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 3, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011MS00045, 2011. a
Laxon, S. W., Giles, K. A., Ridout, A. L., Wingham, D. J., Willatt, R., Cullen, R., Kwok, R., Schweiger, A., Zhang, J., Haas, C., Hendricks, S., Krishfield, R., Kurtz, N., Farrell, S., and Davidson, M.: CryoSat-2 estimates of Arctic sea ice thickness and volume, Geophysical Research Letters, 40, 732–737, 2013. a, b
Lipscomb, W. H.: Remapping the thickness distribution in sea ice models, Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 106, 13989–14000, 2001. a
Lipscomb, W. H. and Hunke, E. C.: Modeling sea ice transport using incremental remapping, Monthly Weather Review, 132, 1341–1354, 2004. a
Louet, J. and Bruzzi, S.: ENVISAT mission and system, in: IEEE 1999 International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium. IGARSS'99 (Cat. No. 99CH36293), vol. 3, IEEE, 1680–1682, https://doi.org/10.1109/IGARSS.1999.772059, 1999. a, b
Massonnet, F., Fichefet, T., and Goosse, H.: Prospects for improved seasonal Arctic sea ice predictions from multivariate data assimilation, Ocean Modelling, 88, 16–25, 2015. a
Massonnet, F., Barthélemy, A., Worou, K., Fichefet, T., Vancoppenolle, M., Rousset, C., and Moreno-Chamarro, E.: On the discretization of the ice thickness distribution in the NEMO3.6-LIM3 global ocean–sea ice model, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 3745–3758, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3745-2019, 2019. a
Min, C., Yang, Q., Luo, H., Chen, D., Krumpen, T., Mamnun, N., Liu, X., and Nerger, L.: Improving Arctic sea-ice thickness estimates with the assimilation of CryoSat-2 summer observations, Ocean-Land-Atmosphere Research, 2, 0025, https://doi.org/10.34133/olar.0025, 2023. a
Moss, R. H., Edmonds, J. A., Hibbard, K. A., Manning, M. R., Rose, S. K., Van Vuuren, D. P., Carter, T. R., Emori, S., Kainuma, M., Kram, T., Meehl, G. A., Mitchell, J. F. B., Nakicenovic, N., Riahi, K., Smith, S. J., Stouffer, R. J., Thomson, A. M., Weyant, J. P., and Wilbanks, T. J.: The next generation of scenarios for climate change research and assessment, Nature, 463, 747–756, 2010. a
Msadek, R., Vecchi, G. A., Winton, M., and Gudgel, R. G.: Importance of initial conditions in seasonal predictions of Arctic sea ice extent, Geophysical Research Letters, 41, 5208–5215, 2014. a
Neale, R. B., Chen, C.-C., Gettelman, A., Lauritzen, P. H., Park, S., Williamson, D. L., Conley, A. J., Garcia, R., Kinnison, D., Lamarque, J.-F., Marsh, D., Mills, M., Smith, A. K., Tilmes, S., Vitt, F., Morrison, H., Cameron-Smith, P., Collins, W. D., Iacono, M. J., Easter, R. C., Ghan, S. J., Liu, X., Rasch, P. J., and Taylor, M. A.: Description of the NCAR Community Atmosphere Model (CAM 4.0), Technical Report NCAR/TN-485+STR, National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), https://www2.cesm.ucar.edu/models/ccsm4.0/cam/docs/description/cam4_desc.pdf (last access: 25 July 2024), 2010. a
Nghiem, S., Rigor, I., Perovich, D., Clemente-Colón, P., Weatherly, J., and Neumann, G.: Rapid reduction of Arctic perennial sea ice, Geophysical Research Letters, 34, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GL031138, 2007. a, b
Passos, L., Langehaug, H. R., Årthun, M., Eldevik, T., Bethke, I., and Kimmritz, M.: Impact of initialization methods on the predictive skill in NorCPM: an Arctic–Atlantic case study, Climate Dynamics, 60, 2061–2080, 2023. a
Peterson, K. A., Arribas, A., Hewitt, H., Keen, A., Lea, D., and McLaren, A.: Assessing the forecast skill of Arctic sea ice extent in the GloSea4 seasonal prediction system, Climate Dynamics, 44, 147–162, 2015. a
Petty, A. A., Kurtz, N. T., Kwok, R., Markus, T., and Neumann, T. A.: Winter Arctic sea ice thickness from ICESat-2 freeboards, Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 125, e2019JC015764, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JC015764, 2020. a
Przybylak, R. and Wyszyński, P.: Air temperature changes in the Arctic in the period 1951–2015 in the light of observational and reanalysis data, Theoretical and Applied Climatology, 139, 75–94, 2020. a
Ricker, R., Hendricks, S., Kaleschke, L., Tian-Kunze, X., King, J., and Haas, C.: A weekly Arctic sea-ice thickness data record from merged CryoSat-2 and SMOS satellite data, The Cryosphere, 11, 1607–1623, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-11-1607-2017, 2017. a
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
Rodwell, M., Lang, S. T., Ingleby, N., Bormann, N., Hólm, E., Rabier, F., Richardson, D., and Yamaguchi, M.: Reliability in ensemble data assimilation, Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 142, 443–454, 2016. a
Rothrock, D., Percival, D., and Wensnahan, M.: The decline in arctic sea-ice thickness: Separating the spatial, annual, and interannual variability in a quarter century of submarine data, Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 113, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JC004252, 2008. a
Sakov, P., Counillon, F., Bertino, L., Lisæter, K. A., Oke, P. R., and Korablev, A.: TOPAZ4: an ocean-sea ice data assimilation system for the North Atlantic and Arctic, Ocean Sci., 8, 633–656, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-8-633-2012, 2012. a, b, c, d
Schröder, D., Feltham, D. L., Flocco, D., and Tsamados, M.: September Arctic sea-ice minimum predicted by spring melt-pond fraction, Nature Climate Change, 4, 353–357, 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, b
Schwegmann, S., Rinne, E., Ricker, R., Hendricks, S., and Helm, V.: About the consistency between Envisat and CryoSat-2 radar freeboard retrieval over Antarctic sea ice, The Cryosphere, 10, 1415–1425, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-10-1415-2016, 2016. a
Schweiger, A., Lindsay, R., Zhang, J., Steele, M., Stern, H., and Kwok, R.: Uncertainty in modeled Arctic sea ice volume, Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 116, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JC007084, 2011. a, b, c
Serreze, M. C. and Meier, W. N.: The Arctic's sea ice cover: trends, variability, predictability, and comparisons to the Antarctic, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1436, 36–53, 2019. a
Serreze, M. C., Crawford, A. D., Stroeve, J. C., Barrett, A. P., and Woodgate, R. A.: Variability, trends, and predictability of seasonal sea ice retreat and advance in the Chukchi Sea, Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 121, 7308–7325, 2016. a
Sievers, I., Rasmussen, T. A. S., and Stenseng, L.: Assimilating CryoSat-2 freeboard to improve Arctic sea ice thickness estimates, The Cryosphere, 17, 3721–3738, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-3721-2023, 2023. a
Singh, T., Counillon, F., Tjiputra, J., Wang, Y., and Gharamti, M. E.: Estimation of ocean biogeochemical parameters in an earth system model using the dual one step ahead smoother: A twin experiment, Frontiers in Marine Science, 9, 775394, https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2022.775394, 2022. a
Singh, T., Counillon, F., Tjiputra, J., and Wang, Y.: A novel ensemble-based parameter estimation for improving ocean biogeochemistry in an Earth system model, Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 17, e2024MS004237, https://doi.org/10.1029/2024MS004237, 2025. a
Smith, D. M., Eade, R., Scaife, A. A., Caron, L.-P., Danabasoglu, G., DelSole, T. M., Delworth, T., Doblas-Reyes, F. J., Dunstone, N. J., Hermanson, L., Kharin, V., Kimoto, M., Merryfield, W. J., MOchizuki, T., Muller, W. A., Pohlmann, H., Yeager, S., and Yang, X.: Robust skill of decadal climate predictions, Npj Climate and Atmospheric Science, 2, 13, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-019-0071-y, 2019. a
Steele, M., Ermold, W., and Zhang, J.: Arctic Ocean surface warming trends over the past 100 years, Geophysical Research Letters, 35, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GL031651, 2008. a
Stroeve, J., Hamilton, L. C., Bitz, C. M., and Blanchard-Wrigglesworth, E.: Predicting September sea ice: Ensemble skill of the SEARCH sea ice outlook 2008–2013, Geophysical Research Letters, 41, 2411–2418, 2014a. a
Stroeve, J. C., Markus, T., Boisvert, L., Miller, J., and Barrett, A.: Changes in Arctic melt season and implications for sea ice loss, Geophysical Research Letters, 41, 1216–1225, 2014b. a
Sumata, H., Gerdes, R., Kauker, F., and Karcher, M.: Empirical error functions for monthly mean Arctic sea-ice drift, Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 120, 7450–7475, 2015. a
Sumata, H., de Steur, L., Divine, D. V., Granskog, M. A., and Gerland, S.: Regime shift in Arctic Ocean sea ice thickness, Nature, 615, 443–449, 2023. a
Sun, S. and Solomon, A.: Suitability of the CICE sea ice model for seasonal prediction and positive impact of CryoSat-2 ice thickness initialization, The Cryosphere, 18, 3033–3048, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-3033-2024, 2024. a
Taylor, K. E., Stouffer, R. J., and Meehl, G. A.: An overview of CMIP5 and the experiment design, Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 93, 485–498, 2012. a
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, Geophysical Research Letters, 41, 1035–1043, 2014. a
Tilling, R., Ridout, A., and Shepherd, A.: Assessing the impact of lead and floe sampling on Arctic sea ice thickness estimates from Envisat and CryoSat-2, Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 124, 7473–7485, 2019. a
Tilling, R. L., Ridout, A., and Shepherd, A.: Estimating Arctic sea ice thickness and volume using CryoSat-2 radar altimeter data, Advances in Space Research, 62, 1203–1225, 2018. a
Von Storch, H. and Zwiers, F. W.: Statistical analysis in climate research, Cambridge University Press, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511612336, 2002. a
Wahba, G., Johnson, D. R., Gao, F., and Gong, J.: Adaptive tuning of numerical weather prediction models: Randomized GCV in three-and four-dimensional data assimilation, Monthly Weather Review, 123, 3358–3370, 1995. a
Wang, W., Chen, M., and Kumar, A.: Seasonal prediction of Arctic sea ice extent from a coupled dynamical forecast system, Monthly Weather Review, 141, 1375–1394, 2013. a
Wang, X., Key, J., Kwok, R., and Zhang, J.: Comparison of Arctic sea ice thickness from satellites, aircraft, and PIOMAS data, Remote Sensing, 8, 713, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs8090713, 2016. a
Williams, N., Byrne, N., Feltham, D., Van Leeuwen, P. J., Bannister, R., Schroeder, D., Ridout, A., and Nerger, L.: The effects of assimilating a sub-grid-scale sea ice thickness distribution in a new Arctic sea ice data assimilation system, The Cryosphere, 17, 2509–2532, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-2509-2023, 2023. a
Xie, J., Counillon, F., and Bertino, L.: Impact of assimilating a merged sea-ice thickness from CryoSat-2 and SMOS in the Arctic reanalysis, The Cryosphere, 12, 3671–3691, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-12-3671-2018, 2018. a
Zhang, J. and Rothrock, D. A.: Modeling global sea ice with a thickness and enthalpy distribution model in generalized curvilinear coordinates, Monthly Weather Review, 131, 845–861, 2003. a
Zhang, Y.-F., Bushuk, M., Winton, M., Hurlin, B., Yang, X., Delworth, T., and Jia, L.: Assimilation of satellite-retrieved sea ice concentration and prospects for september predictions of Arctic sea ice, Journal of Climate, 34, 2107–2126, 2021. a
Zhang, Y.-F., Bushuk, M., Winton, M., Hurlin, B., Gregory, W., Landy, J., and Jia, L.: Improvements in September Arctic Sea Ice Predictions Via Assimilation of Summer CryoSat-2 Sea Ice Thickness Observations, Geophysical Research Letters, 50, e2023GL105672, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023GL105672, 2023. a
Zheng, L., Cheng, X., Chen, Z., and Liang, Q.: Delay in Arctic Sea ice freeze-up linked to early summer sea ice loss: evidence from satellite observations, Remote Sensing, 13, 2162, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13112162, 2021. a
Short summary
We assimilate satellite observations of Arctic sea ice thickness to create a skillful initial sea ice state, assimilating ENVISAT-derived sea ice thickness for the first time. We produce a reanalysis and seasonal hindcasts showing that sea ice thickness and volume estimates are significantly improved in both reanalysis and prediction. Predictions of summer sea ice extent in our model are also substantially improved by reducing the high sea ice thickness bias.
We assimilate satellite observations of Arctic sea ice thickness to create a skillful initial...
