| 07 Oct 2025
Detection of structural deficiencies in a global aerosol model to explain limits in parametric uncertainty reduction
Abstract. Understanding and reducing uncertainty in model-based estimates of aerosol radiative forcing is crucial for improving climate projections. A key challenge is that differences between model output and observations can stem from uncertainties in input parameters (parametric uncertainty) or from deficiencies in model code and configuration (structural uncertainty), and these two causes are difficult to distinguish. Structural deficiencies limit efforts to reduce parametric uncertainty through observational constraint because they prevent models from being simultaneously consistent with multiple observations. However, no framework exists to detect structural deficiencies and assess their impact on parametric uncertainty. We propose a workflow to identify structural inconsistencies between observational constraints and diagnose potential structural deficiencies. Using a perturbed parameter ensemble, we sample uncertainty in aerosols, clouds, and radiation in the UK Earth System Model (UKESM), and evaluate model bias against in-situ observations of sulfate aerosol, sulfur dioxide, aerosol optical depth, and particle number concentration across Europe. Applying observational constraints reveals inconsistencies that no combination of the perturbed parameters can resolve. For example, sulfate concentrations in different regions cannot be matched simultaneously, and enforcing a compromise between region reduces skill across most variables. Additional examples include an inter-region inconsistency in SO2 and an inter-variable inconsistency between aerosol optical depth and sulfate. By examining the parameter sets retained by constraints, we trace inconsistencies to the parameterisations that may cause them and propose targeted changes to address them. This approach offers a pathway for evidence-based model development that supports more robust uncertainty reduction and improves climate projection skill.
Competing interests: At least one of the (co-)authors is a member of the editorial board of Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.
Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this paper. While Copernicus Publications makes every effort to include appropriate place names, the final responsibility lies with the authors. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.
