the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
A Systematic Atmospheric Parameter Optimization method to Improve ENSO Simulation in the ICON XPP Earth System Model
Abstract. The El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) is a dominant mode of interannual climate variability, yet accurately simulating ENSO in climate models remains a major challenge due to its complex coupled dynamics. In this study, we present a novel linear optimization methodology and systematically adjust atmospheric parameters to improve ENSO fidelity in the Icosahedral Nonhydrostatic eXtended Predictions and Projections (ICON XPP) Earth System Model of the Max-Planck-Institute for Meteorology. The optimization approach is based on the superposition of parameter sensitivities and a Nelder–Mead algorithm that reduces the ENSO cost function. The cost function account for ENSO-related tropical climatology, variability, and feedbacks, which are estimated with the ENSO metric package. We firstly assess the sensitivity of ENSO metrics to 21 atmospheric parameters in atmosphere-only simulations. The optimization approach reduces the ENSO cost function by 30 % in the optimized atmosphere-only runs. Key improvements include reduced precipitation bias and strengthened atmospheric feedbacks such as the Bjerknes and thermal damping feedbacks. These results demonstrate the effectiveness of our method in improving ENSO metrics within the atmosphere-only configuration. Six parameters identified as most impactful from atmosphere-only tuning experiments are subsequently tuned in fully coupled simulations. The optimized fully coupled run yields moderate improvements in ENSO amplitude, cold tongue SST bias, seasonal phase-locking, ocean-atmosphere coupling and teleconnection patterns. However, isolated ENSO tuning introduces unrealistic global warming, which is further corrected by adjusting turbulence-related parameters without degrading ENSO skill. These results demonstrate that systematic ENSO tuning can yield performance gains but must be balanced with broader climate stability constraints. Our method offers a scalable, physically grounded optimization strategy, with strong potential for tuning ENSO in climate model configurations.
- Preprint
(4449 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 06 Mar 2026)
-
CEC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-5736 - No compliance with the policy of the journal', Juan Antonio Añel, 11 Feb 2026
reply
-
AC1: 'Reply on CEC1', Dakuan Yu, 12 Feb 2026
reply
Dear Prof. Añel,
Thank you for your detailed assessment and for drawing our attention to the non-compliance of our previous submission with the journal’s Code and Data Policy. We fully agree on the importance of long-term accessibility and reproducibility.
We have now addressed all concerns and deposited the complete material in appropriate long-term repositories with persistent identifiers.
All scripts, processed data, raw ENSO metric outputs, observational datasets used in the study, and the exact version of the ENSO Metrics Package employed in our analysis are archived at:
Yu, D., Dommenget, D., Pohlmann, H., and Müller, W. (2026):
Source data and scripts for publication “A Systematic Atmospheric Parameter Optimization Method to Improve ENSO Simulation in the ICON XPP Earth System Model”, Zenodo, Version v2,
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18622333This Zenodo archive includes:
-
MATLAB optimisation scripts,
-
Parameter sensitivity diagnostics,
-
Raw ENSO metric outputs from atmosphere-only and coupled simulations,
-
The archived ENSO Metrics Package (version 1.1.3) used in this study,
-
Observational datasets (GPCP v2.3, TropFlux, and GODAS) required to reproduce the evaluation results,
The climate simulations were performed using ICON Release 2024.07, archived at the World Data Center for Climate, DOI: https://doi.org/10.35089/WDCC/IconRelease2024.07. No modifications to the ICON source code were made.
Accordingly, we have revised the “Code and Data Availability” section of the manuscript to cite these repositories and DOIs, and updated the bibliography where necessary.
We believe that these modifications fully resolve the issues raised and bring the manuscript into compliance with the journal’s Code and Data Policy. We kindly ask that the review process may now proceed.
Thank you again for your careful oversight.
With best regards,
Dakuan Yu
(on behalf of all co-authors)New Code and Data Availability
All scripts, processed data, and raw ENSO metric outputs required to reproduce the results of this study are archived at Zenodo, Version v2:
The archive includes:
-
MATLAB optimisation scripts,
-
Parameter sensitivity diagnostics,
-
Raw ENSO metric outputs from atmosphere-only and coupled simulations,
-
An archived copy of the ENSO Metrics Package (version 1.1.3),
-
Observational datasets used in this study.
Simulations were performed using ICON Release 2024.07 (ICON partnership, 2024), archived at the World Data Center for Climate, DOI: https://doi.org/10.35089/WDCC/IconRelease2024.07. No modifications to the ICON source code were made.
ENSO diagnostics were computed using version 1.1.3 of the ENSO Metrics Package (Planton et al., 2021). The exact version used is included in the Zenodo archive.
-
CEC2: 'Reply on AC1', Juan Antonio Añel, 12 Feb 2026
reply
Dear authors,
Many thanks for your quick reply and for addressing the outstanding issues. We can consider now the current version of your manuscript in compliance with the Code and Data Policy of the journal.
Simply, I would like to know that you mention that you have used the proprietary interpreter for M language Matlab. It would be good that you indicate in your manuscript if the scripts are interpreter-depending, or if they run with FLOSS options, such as GNU Octave. Also, please, indicate in the manuscript the version number of the Matlab interpreter that you have used here, as, among others, the company owning such proprietary software does not ensure compatibility of the software developed under different versions, and bugs have been reported for Matlab in the past. If eventually in the future a new one appears that could affect computations, it is good to know if the ones presented in a given paper are affected by it.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-5736-CEC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on CEC2', Dakuan Yu, 12 Feb 2026
reply
Dear Prof. Añel,
Thank you for your careful follow-up.
We appreciate your important remark regarding the use of MATLAB. The optimisation and diagnostic scripts were executed using MATLAB R2024b (MathWorks, Inc.). The scripts rely only on base MATLAB functionality and do not require proprietary toolboxes. We will explicitly state this version number in the revised manuscript.
Thank you again for your thorough editorial oversight.
With kind regards,
Dakuan Yu
(on behalf of all co-authors)
-
AC2: 'Reply on CEC2', Dakuan Yu, 12 Feb 2026
reply
-
-
AC1: 'Reply on CEC1', Dakuan Yu, 12 Feb 2026
reply
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-5736', Anonymous Referee #1, 26 Feb 2026
reply
Review of “A Systematic Atmospheric Parameter Optimization method to Improve ENSO Simulation in the ICON XPP Earth System Model” by Yu et al.
General comments:
This study presented a linear optimization methodology to improve ENSO fidelity in the ICON XPP Earth System Model. The authors firstly assessed the sensitivity of ENSO metrics to 21 atmospheric parameters in atmosphere-only simulations. Then, six parameters were identified as most impactful and were subsequently tuned in fully coupled simulations, yielding moderate improvements in various ENSO metrics. Overall, the results demonstrated that the newly proposed method can effectively optimize key atmospheric parameters to improve representation of critical ENSO characteristics and feedback processes fidelity within a climate model. However, some aspects related to the optimization methodology should be improved before the paper is suitable for publication.
Major comments:
- As stated by the authors, one of the novelties of this work is that they provided a newly proposed optimization method. However, the motivation to develop such a new method is unclear to me. Many previous studies focusing on parametric sensitivity or parameter calibration have been conducted in the past two decades. The limitations of the methodologies in previous studies and the advantage of the new method provided here (e.g., linear vs nonlinear; direct tuning vs using surrogate model) should be discussed in more detail.
- For both atmosphere-only and fully coupled experiments, the cost functions are rescaled by the parameter setting in the control runs. This helps prevent the optimized parameter values from deviating excessively from their control-run settings, thereby ensuring physical plausibility (Line 408). However, the default settings are different in the atmosphere-only and in the fully coupled experiments. One may ask which setting has more physical plausibility?
- In section 3.4, the ENSO metric is estimated by using Eq. 11, which is based on the pre-calculated parameter sensitivities. However, the lefthand side of Eq. 11 (i.e., delta_m) is expressed as a quadratic function of a physical variable which measures the difference between simulation and observation (according to Line 386), while the righthand side of Eq. 11 is just a linear function with no observation information included (according to Line 323). So it is unclear to me what are the physical meaning and theoretical basis of Eq. 11?
Other comments:
- Line 267 (i.e., Eq. 3), phi_l or phi_i? Same question for Line 276.
- Line 352, “the correlation between the pair of sensitivities is shown in the heading of each panel”. It seems it is not given in the figure.
- Line 372, left X-axis, RMSE?
- Line 402 (i.e., Eq. 9), np_i or np_k?
- Line 409, the constraint term delta_limit ensures that parameters remain within physically meaningful bounds. Do the authors mean some values of parameters are out of the prescribed bounds? How does the sampling algorithm work when searching the parameter space?
- Line 695, the use of the word “although” is a bit strange.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-5736-RC1
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 193 | 76 | 24 | 293 | 17 | 13 |
- HTML: 193
- PDF: 76
- XML: 24
- Total: 293
- BibTeX: 17
- EndNote: 13
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
Dear authors,
Unfortunately, after checking your manuscript, it has come to our attention that it does not comply with our "Code and Data Policy".
https://www.geoscientific-model-development.net/policies/code_and_data_policy.html
You have archived all your code and data on sites that we can not accept. For example, in the case of GitHub, it is not a suitable repository for scientific publication. GitHub itself instructs authors to use other long-term archival and publishing alternatives, such as Zenodo. Also, you have archived part of code and the data used and produced in your work in Edmond; however, Edmond does not fulfil GMD’s requirements for a persistent data archive. Only in the cases where the administrators of Edmond confirm us that they have permanently removed the permissions for edition or deletion of the data by their authors, it can be acceptable. For the ICON model you have linked icon-model.org, which we can not accept. The sites linked for GPCPv2.3, TropFlux, and GODAS are neither acceptable.
Therefore, the current situation with your manuscript is irregular, and it should have never been accepted for peer-review or Discussions in the journal due to the above mentioned issues. The GMD review and publication process depends on reviewers and community commentators being able to access, during the discussion phase, the code and data on which a manuscript depends, and on ensuring the provenance of replicability of the published papers for years after their publication. Please, therefore, publish your code and data in one of the appropriate repositories and reply to this comment with the relevant information (link and a permanent identifier for it (e.g. DOI)) as soon as possible. We cannot have manuscripts under discussion that do not comply with our policy.
The 'Code and Data Availability’ section must also be modified to cite the new repository locations, and corresponding references added to the bibliography.
I must note that if you do not fix this problem, we cannot continue with the peer-review process or accept your manuscript for publication in GMD.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor