Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-5144
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-5144
08 Sep 2026
 | 08 Sep 2026
Status: this preprint is open for discussion and under review for Weather and Climate Dynamics (WCD).

Sensitivity of the Lagrangian temperature anomaly decomposition to model choice: Lessons from the 2021 Pacific Northwest heatwave

Albenis Pérez-Alarcón, Raquel Nieto, and Luis Gimeno

Abstract. The Lagrangian temperature anomaly decomposition has emerged as a powerful tool for quantifying the relative importance of adiabatic, advective and diabatic processes during heatwaves. However, its sensitivity to the choice of Lagrangian model, whether pure-trajectory or dispersion-based, remains poorly understood. Using seven different trajectory sets, we apply this decomposition to the June 2021 Pacific Northwest heatwave to examine discrepancies in process attribution across model classes. Pure-trajectory models consistently identify diabatic heating as the dominant contributor, whereas dispersion models attribute the largest fraction to adiabatic warming. A trajectory cluster analysis and parcel position diagnostics reveal that this divergence does not stem from different geographic origins or the near-surface vertical distribution over the target region during the heatwave, which are broadly similar across trajectory sets, but from contrasting vertical histories. While dispersion-model parcels reside at higher altitudes before arrival, exposing them to subsidence warming, pure-trajectory parcels remain near the surface where land–atmosphere feedbacks and antecedent dry soils amplify diabatic heating. These findings demonstrate that this Lagrangian framework is fundamentally sensitive to model choice, particularly to the representation of turbulent motion, which induce parcel vertical dispersion absent in the resolved wind fields. While this study does not establish which Lagrangian model class is most suitable, it represents a first step toward understanding these discrepancies and cautions that heatwave attribution studies relying on a single Lagrangian model should interpret inferred process dominance carefully, as it may reflect methodological choices rather than the underlying physics alone.

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.
Share
Albenis Pérez-Alarcón, Raquel Nieto, and Luis Gimeno

Status: open (until 20 Oct 2026)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
Albenis Pérez-Alarcón, Raquel Nieto, and Luis Gimeno
Albenis Pérez-Alarcón, Raquel Nieto, and Luis Gimeno
Metrics will be available soon.
Latest update: 08 Sep 2026
Download
Short summary
We assess the sensitivity of the Lagrangian temperature anomaly decomposition to model choice using the 2021 Pacific Northwest heatwave. Our results show that pure Lagrangian trajectory models attribute warming primarily to diabatic heating, while dispersion models favour adiabatic warming. This divergence stems from differing vertical histories and turbulence treatment, cautioning that inferred process dominance may reflect methodological choices rather than underlying physics.
Share