| | 1 | === 24 Mai 2024 === |
| | 2 | |
| | 3 | * Pedalons of June, 10th : what do we present ? |
| | 4 | |
| | 5 | presentation of Guillaume about globrt AMIP vs SST coupled => would also address the latest question of Frederic : can we conclude that the offset in TOA, as compared to previous versions of the model, is due to NEMOv4, specifically the new sea ice model ? |
| | 6 | |
| | 7 | other formulation of this question, why do we end up with such a wide range of SST and globrt in coupled simulations : due to sea ice ? |
| | 8 | |
| | 9 | TODO : including globrt and SST data from the 4 QUEST simulations in our scatter plot, just to see where they locate as compared to the simulations with NEMOv4 => Juliette et Guillaume font un peu d'archelologie pour retrouver les simus |
| | 10 | |
| | 11 | presentation of Brady on ... |
| | 12 | |
| | 13 | presentation generique de Julie sur toutes les pistes abordées depuis Pedalons de janvier, mais pas encore abouties : PCA, les differences entre nnetau à 0 ou 1, le debut de l'inclusion des obs + les pistes en suspens à relancer (protocole pdCtrl ?) |
| | 14 | |
| | 15 | presentation de Guillaume sur MEVISTO |
| | 16 | |
| | 17 | + presentation de Casimir sur tuning OMIP ? |
| | 18 | |
| | 19 | presentation specifique glace de mer dans l'ensemble de simus, et aussi des nouvelles simus IPSLCM7 lonlat si disponibles (MEVISTO + CESMEP) |
| | 20 | |
| | 21 | |
| | 22 | |
| | 23 | |
| | 24 | |
| | 25 | * investigations of Brady about contributions to net top in amip vs coupled, into net cleasky SW, LW and CRE SW and LW... |
| | 26 | |
| | 27 | when interactive sea ice, anomalies in SW and LW for clearsky mostly, while CRE fluxes are very similar in shape and magnitude, in between amip and coupled - signs to be checked, and following story of interpretations to be checked again |
| | 28 | |
| | 29 | |
| | 30 | |
| | 31 | |
