ORCID Profile
0000-0001-9171-6247
Current Organisations
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB)
,
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
,
Alfred-Wegener-Institut für Polar und Meeresforschung
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Copernicus GmbH
Date: 26-06-2023
Publisher: Copernicus GmbH
Date: 29-01-2020
DOI: 10.5194/GMD-2019-363
Abstract: Abstract. We present a new framework for global ocean–sea-ice model simulations based on phase 2 of the Ocean Model Intercomparison Project (OMIP-2), making use of the JRA55-do atmospheric dataset. We motivate the use of OMIP-2 over the framework for the first phase of OMIP (OMIP-1), previously referred to as the Coordinated Ocean–ice Reference Experiments (CORE), via the evaluation of OMIP-1 and OMIP-2 simulations from eleven (11) state-of-the-science global ocean–sea-ice models. In the present evaluation, multi-model means are calculated separately for the OMIP-1 and OMIP-2 simulations and overall performances are assessed considering metrics commonly used by ocean modelers. Many features are very similar between OMIP-1 and OMIP-2 simulations, and yet we also identify key improvements in transitioning from OMIP-1 to OMIP-2. For ex le, the sea surface temperature of the OMIP-2 simulations reproduce the observed global warming during the 1980s and 1990s, as well as the warming hiatus in the 2000s and the more recent accelerated warming, which were absent in OMIP-1, noting that OMIP-1 forcing stopped in 2009. A negative bias in the sea-ice concentration in summer of both hemispheres in OMIP-1 is significantly reduced in OMIP-2. The overall reproducibility of both seasonal and interannual variations in sea surface temperature and sea surface height (dynamic sea level) is improved in OMIP-2. Many of the remaining common model biases may be attributed either to errors in representing important processes in ocean–sea-ice models, some of which are expected to be reduced by using finer horizontal and/or vertical resolutions, or to shared biases in the atmospheric forcing. In particular, further efforts are warranted to reduce remaining biases in OMIP-2 such as those related to the erroneous representation of deep and bottom water formations and circulations. We suggest that such problems can be resolved through collaboration between those developing models (including parameterizations) and forcing datasets.
Publisher: Copernicus GmbH
Date: 29-01-2020
Publisher: Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)
Date: 2014
DOI: 10.1039/C3CS60405E
Abstract: Artificial photosynthesis involves transforming water and CO 2 into O 2 and carbohydrates: a challenging task for bioinspired renewable energy conversion schemes.
Publisher: Copernicus GmbH
Date: 21-08-2020
Abstract: Abstract. We present a new framework for global ocean–sea-ice model simulations based on phase 2 of the Ocean Model Intercomparison Project (OMIP-2), making use of the surface dataset based on the Japanese 55-year atmospheric reanalysis for driving ocean–sea-ice models (JRA55-do). We motivate the use of OMIP-2 over the framework for the first phase of OMIP (OMIP-1), previously referred to as the Coordinated Ocean–ice Reference Experiments (COREs), via the evaluation of OMIP-1 and OMIP-2 simulations from 11 state-of-the-science global ocean–sea-ice models. In the present evaluation, multi-model ensemble means and spreads are calculated separately for the OMIP-1 and OMIP-2 simulations and overall performance is assessed considering metrics commonly used by ocean modelers. Both OMIP-1 and OMIP-2 multi-model ensemble ranges capture observations in more than 80 % of the time and region for most metrics, with the multi-model ensemble spread greatly exceeding the difference between the means of the two datasets. Many features, including some climatologically relevant ocean circulation indices, are very similar between OMIP-1 and OMIP-2 simulations, and yet we could also identify key qualitative improvements in transitioning from OMIP-1 to OMIP-2. For ex le, the sea surface temperatures of the OMIP-2 simulations reproduce the observed global warming during the 1980s and 1990s, as well as the warming slowdown in the 2000s and the more recent accelerated warming, which were absent in OMIP-1, noting that the last feature is part of the design of OMIP-2 because OMIP-1 forcing stopped in 2009. A negative bias in the sea-ice concentration in summer of both hemispheres in OMIP-1 is significantly reduced in OMIP-2. The overall reproducibility of both seasonal and interannual variations in sea surface temperature and sea surface height (dynamic sea level) is improved in OMIP-2. These improvements represent a new capability of the OMIP-2 framework for evaluating process-level responses using simulation results. Regarding the sensitivity of in idual models to the change in forcing, the models show well-ordered responses for the metrics that are directly forced, while they show less organized responses for those that require complex model adjustments. Many of the remaining common model biases may be attributed either to errors in representing important processes in ocean–sea-ice models, some of which are expected to be reduced by using finer horizontal and/or vertical resolutions, or to shared biases and limitations in the atmospheric forcing. In particular, further efforts are warranted to resolve remaining issues in OMIP-2 such as the warm bias in the upper layer, the mismatch between the observed and simulated variability of heat content and thermosteric sea level before 1990s, and the erroneous representation of deep and bottom water formations and circulations. We suggest that such problems can be resolved through collaboration between those developing models (including parameterizations) and forcing datasets. Overall, the present assessment justifies our recommendation that future model development and analysis studies use the OMIP-2 framework.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 02-2020
DOI: 10.1016/J.WOMBI.2018.11.017
Abstract: Qualitative evidence has provided rich descriptions around reasons for planning a homebirth with a midwife. Reasons and the importance, confidence and support around this option have not been examined by parity with a larger cohort. Examine women's characteristics, reasons and perceptions of the importance, confidence and support around choosing homebirth based upon parity. A mixed method approach was undertaken within a prospective cohort study in Western Australia where women planning a homebirth have the option of a publicly funded model or care from privately practising midwives. At recruitment a questionnaire collected demographic data, perceived importance, confidence and support plus reasons for choosing homebirth. A qualitative component included an open ended question that encouraged sharing of opinions providing textual data explored by content analysis. Reasons noted by 211 pregnant women for choosing homebirth were: avoidance of unnecessary intervention (58.8%), comfort and familiarity of home (34.1%), freedom of making own choices (25.6%), and having more continuity of care (24.2%). Reasons for planning homebirth were similar by parity, except for comfort of home being more important (44.0% vs 28.7%, p=0.025) and continuity of care (13.3% vs 30.1%, p=0.006) being less important to primigravid women. Themes revealed common beliefs around childbirth, appreciation for access to homebirth and a desire for greater awareness and less negativity around homebirth. Regardless of parity, homebirth was believed to be safe and supported by partners. Reasons identified from qualitative research to avoid intervention, the comfort of home, choice and continuity of care were supported.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 20-08-2018
Abstract: The Ru complex [Ru
Publisher: American Geophysical Union (AGU)
Date: 04-2020
DOI: 10.1029/2019JC015522
Publisher: Copernicus GmbH
Date: 26-06-2023
DOI: 10.5194/GMD-2023-123
Abstract: Abstract. This study evaluates the impact of increasing resolution on Arctic Ocean simulations using five pairs of matched low- and high-resolution models within the OMIP-2 framework. The primary objective is to assess whether higher resolution can mitigate typical biases observed in low-resolution models and improve the representation of key climate-relevant variables. We reveal that increasing horizontal resolution contributes to a reduction in biases in mean temperature and salinity, and improves the simulation of the Atlantic Water layer and its decadal warming events. Higher resolution also leads to improved agreement with observed surface mixed layer depth, cold halocline base depth and Arctic gateway transports. However, the simulation of the mean state and temporal changes in Arctic freshwater content does not show improvement with increased resolution. While the use of higher resolution demonstrates positive outcomes for certain variables, it is crucial to recognize that model numerics and parameterizations also play a significant role in achieving faithful simulations. Overall, higher resolution shows promise in improving the simulation of key Arctic Ocean features and processes, but comprehensive model development is required to achieve more accurate representations across all climate-relevant variables.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 08-2018
Location: Germany
Location: Germany
No related grants have been discovered for Laia Francàs Forcada.