Assessment of simulations of a polar low with the Canadian Regional Climate Model

31. Laprise R. The Euler Equations of Motion with Hydrostatic Pressure as an Independent Variable. Mon Weather Rev. 1992; 120(1): 197–207. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1992)120<0197:Teeomw>2. 0.Co;2 32. Davies HC. A lateral boundary formulation for multi-level prediction models. Q J Roy Meteorol Soc. 1976; 102(432): 405–18. https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.49710243210 33. Wessel P, Smith WHF. A global, self-consistent, hierarchical, high-resolution shoreline database. Jour- nal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth. 1996; 101(B4): 8741–3. https://doi.org/10.1029/96JB00104 34. Li J, Barker HW. A Radiation Algorithm with Correlated-k Distribution. Part I: Local Thermal Equilibrium. J Atmos Sci. 2005; 62(2): 286–309. https://doi.org/10.1175/jas-3396.1 35. Mailhot J, Be´ lair S. An examination of a unified cloudiness-turbulence scheme with various types of cloudy boundary layers. 14th Symposium on Boundary Layer and Turbulence; Wageningen, The Neth- erlands: Amer. Meteor. Soc.; 2000. 36. Milbrandt JA, Morrison H. Parameterization of Cloud Microphysics Based on the Prediction of Bulk Ice Particle Properties. Part III: Introduction of Multiple Free Categories. J Atmos Sci. 2016; 73(3): 975–95. https://doi.org/10.1175/jas-d-15-0204.1 37. Noilhan J, Mahfouf JF. The ISBA land surface parameterisation scheme. Global Planet Change. 1996; 13(1): 145–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/0921-8181(95)00043-7 38. Brasseur O. and Application of a Physical Approach to Estimating Wind Gusts. Mon Weather Rev. 2001; 129(1): 5–25. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(2001)129<0005:Daaoap>2.0.Co;2.

39. Centurioni L, Hora´ nyi A, Cardinali C, Charpentier E, Lumpkin R. A Global Ocean Observing System for Measuring Sea Level Atmospheric Pressure: Effects and Impacts on Numerical Weather Prediction. Bull Am Meteorol Soc. 2017; 98(2): 231–8. https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-15-00080.1 40. Bell B, Hersbach H, Simmons A, Berrisford P, Dahlgren P, Hora´ nyi A, et al. The ERA5 global reanalysis: Preliminary extension to 1950. Q J Roy Meteorol Soc. 2021; 147(741): 4186–227. https://doi.org/10. 1002/qj.4174 41. Graham RM, Hudson SR, Maturilli M. Improved Performance of ERA5 in Arctic Gateway Relative to Four Global Atmospheric Reanalyses. Geophys Res Lett. 2019; 46(11): 6138–47. https://doi.org/10. 1029/2019GL082781 42. Mayer M, Tietsche S, Haimberger L, Tsubouchi T, Mayer J, Zuo H. An Improved Estimate of the Cou- pled Arctic Energy Budget. J Clim. 2019; 32(22): 7915–34. https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-19-0233.1 43. Batrak Y, Mu¨ller M. On the warm bias in atmospheric reanalyses induced by the missing snow over Arc- tic sea-ice. Nature Communications. 2019; 10(1): 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-11975-3 PMID: 31519872 44. Wang C, Graham RM, Wang K, Gerland S, Granskog MA. Comparison of ERA5 and ERA-Interim near- surface air temperature, snowfall and precipitation over Arctic sea ice: effects on sea ice thermodynam- ics and evolution. The Cryosphere. 2019; 13(6): 1661–79. https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-1661-2019 45. Wilks DS. Statistical Methods in the Atmospheric Sciences. 4th ed. San Diego, USA: Elsevier; 2019. 842 p.

46. Fast JD. Mesoscale Modeling and Four-Dimensional Data Assimilation in Areas of Highly Complex Ter- rain. Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology. 1995; 34(12): 2762–82. https://doi.org/10.1175/ 1520-0450(1995)034<2762:Mmafdd>2.0.Co;2 47. Blechschmidt A-M, Bakan S, Graßl H. Large-scale atmospheric circulation patterns during polar low events over the Nordic seas. J Geophys Res Atmos. 2009; 114: D06115. https://doi.org/10.1029/ 2008JD010865 48. Rojo M, Claud C, Mallet P-E, Noer G, Carleton AM, Vicomte M. Polar low tracks over the Nordic Seas: a 14-winter climatic analysis. Tellus A. 2015; 67(1): 24660. https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusa.v67.24660 49. World Meteorological Organization. Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation. Volume I–Mea- surement of Meteorological Variables. 2018 ed. Geneva, Switzerland: World Meteorological Organiza- tion; 2018. 573 p. 50. Hu G, Franzke CLE. Evaluation of Daily Precipitation Extremes in Reanalysis and Gridded Observa- tion-Based Data Sets Over Germany. Geophys Res Lett. 2020; 47(18): e2020GL089624. https://doi. org/10.1029/2020GL089624 51. McTaggart-Cowan R, Vaillancourt PA, Zadra A, Chamberland S, Charron M, Corvec S, et al. Moderni- zation of Atmospheric Physics Parameterization in Canadian NWP. J Adv Model Earth Syst. 2019; 11 (11): 3593–635. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001781 52. Di Luca A, de Elı´a R, Laprise R. Potential for small scale added value of RCM’s downscaled climate change signal. Clim Dyn. 2013; 40(3): 601–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-012-1415-z PLOS ONE

Assessment of simulations of a polar low with the canadian regional climate model PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0292250 October 5, 2023 28 / 28