The software architecture of climate models: a graphical comparison of CMIP5 and EMICAR5 configurations

K. Alexander, S. M. Easterbrook
2015 Geoscientific Model Development Discussions  
We analyse the source code of eight coupled climate models, selected from those that participated in the CMIP5 (Taylor et al., 2012) or EMICAR5 (Eby et al., 2013; Zickfeld et al., 2013) intercomparison projects. For each model, we sort the preprocessed code into components and subcomponents based on dependency structure. We then create software architecture diagrams which show the relative sizes of these components/subcomponents and the flow of data between them. The diagrams also illustrate
more » ... eral major classes of climate model design; the distribution of complexity between components, which depends on historical development paths as well as the conscious goals of each institution; and the sharing of components between different modelling groups. These diagrams offer insights into the similarities and differences between models, and have the potential to be useful tools for communication between scientists, scientific institutions, and the public.
doi:10.5194/gmdd-8-351-2015 fatcat:x6yqc7op2vaohpnch5n7xizk3a