Known limitations of MIROC3.2 and speculated causes 
  * Besides these points, we believe MIROC3.2 is just comparable with or 
  even better than the other state-of-the-art climate models! 
  
  
- TOA radiation imbalance and deep ocean temperature drift Due to the 
  insufficient spinup, TOA radiation budget has a downward imbalance of ~0.5Wm-2 
  in high-res. and ~1. Wm-2 in med-res. The ocean temperature has a warming 
  drift accordingly. However, this drift is limited in deep ocean; upper ocean 
  and above surface climate do not show any serious drift. 
  
  
- Cold bias around tropopause A serious cold bias up to 10K is seen 
  around the tropopause. This is found to be mainly due to insufficient 
  absorption of shortwave radiation by ozone. (This will be fixed in the next 
  version of the model with revised radiation code, unfortunately not in time 
  for the IPCC AR4) 
  
  
- Too shallow subtropical marine boundary layer The subtropical marine 
  boundary layer is too shallow and a serious dry bias is seen above it 
  (900-700hPa). It indicates a need for improving the parameterization of cloud 
  topped boundary layer in this model. 
  
  
- Too much high cloud cover The high clouds seem too much in extent and 
  optically too thick. The middle level clouds are then obscured by them and 
  seem too little when looked at from the space. This may be because cloud cover 
  diagnostics and/or cloud overlapping treatment are not very appropriate. 
  
  
- Thin NH sea ice in high-res./Small SH sea ice extent in med-res. The 
  Northern hemisphere sea ice in high-res. version is not as thick as some 
  observational data. This seems to cause earlier decrease of sea ice extent in 
  the NH responding to the enhancement of GHGs. This is better in the med-res. 
  version, which has, instead, sea ice extent in the Southern hemisphere smaller 
  than observed. 
  
  
- Small amplitude of ENSO The amplitude of ENSO, in terms of the 
  variation of NINO3 SST, for example, is smaller than reality. It seems to be 
  at least partly attributable to a loose thermocline temperature gradient at 
  the equator. 
  
  
- Problem in volcanic aerosol distribution In the 20C3M runs, the 
  distribution of optical thickness of volcanic aerosol is prescribed for each 
  volcanic eruption event. It was intended that its vertical distribution has 
  maximum just above the tropopause (diagnosed from model's temperature lapse 
  rate) and decreases with height. However, due to an error in a model 
  parameter, it has actually a maximum uniformly at 50hPa regardless of the 
  temperature profile. We have confirmed that the effect of this error on 
  overall results, including surface temperature change, is small. However, if 
  you look at the trend of 100hPa temperature in 20C, for example, it should be 
  problematic due to this error. 
Other cautions 
  
  
- Sea level rise diagnosis (zosga) Land ice melt is not explicitly 
  added in the 'zosga' data but it is implicitly treated in the model. Since the 
  mass balance of land ice is not considered in the model, snow over ice 
  exceeding a certain critical amount is considerd to be glacier and flows into 
  the oceans, while melted water from ice does not flow into the oceans. This 
  treatment should be OK for equilibrium control but could be problematic for 
  transient runs. We may revise this data with some correction of this term 
  later. 
  
  
- 20C historical temperature in high-res. The 20C3M run with our 
  high-res. version does not really reproduce the observed warming trend in 
  early 20C and cooling trend in middle 20C. The reason for this is unclear. The 
  20C3M run with our med-res. version, which uses basically the same natural and 
  anthropogenic forcing as in the high-res. run, does reproduce these trends. 
  This might be due to natural inter-decadal variability, but we cannot confirm 
  this because we do not have enough computer resource to make ensemble runs 
  with the high-res. version.