Results of the Marine Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison Project, MISMIP

F. Pattyn (1) , C. Schoof (2) , L. Perichon (1) , R. C. A. Hindmarsh (3) , E. Bueler (4) , B. de Fleurian (5) , Geoffroy Durand (5) , O. Gagliardini (5) , R. Gladstone (6) , D. Goldberg (7) , G. H. Gudmundsson (3) , P. Huybrechts (8) , V. Lee (6) , F. M. Nick (1, 9) , A. J. Payne (6) , D. Pollard (10) , O. Rybak (8) , F. Saito (11) , A. Vieli (12)

1 Laboratoire de Glaciologie [Bruxelles]
2 Department of Earth and Ocean Sciences [Vancouver]
3 BAS - British Antarctic Survey
4 Department of Mathematics and Geophysical Institute
5 LGGE - Laboratoire de glaciologie et géophysique de l'environnement
6 School of Geographical Sciences [Bristol]
7 CIMS - Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences [New York]
8 Earth System Sciences & Department of Geography
9 IMAU - Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Research [Utrecht]
10 Earth and Environmental Systems Institute
11 FRCGC - Frontier Research Center for Global Change
12 Department of Geography

Predictions of marine ice-sheet behaviour require models that are able to robustly simulate grounding line migration. We present results of an intercomparison exercise for marine ice-sheet models. Verification is effected by comparison with approximate analytical solutions for flux across the grounding line using simplified geometrical configurations (no lateral variations, no effects of lateral buttressing). Unique steady state grounding line positions exist for ice sheets on a downward sloping bed, while hysteresis occurs across an overdeepened bed, and stable steady state grounding line positions only occur on the downward-sloping sections. Models based on the shallow ice approximation, which does not resolve extensional stresses, do not reproduce the approximate analytical results unless appropriate parameterizations for ice flux are imposed at the grounding line. For extensional-stress resolving "shelfy stream" models, differences between model results were mainly due to the choice of spatial discretization. Moving grid methods were found to be the most accurate at capturing grounding line evolution, since they track the grounding line explicitly. Adaptive mesh refinement can further improve accuracy, including fixed grid models that generally perform poorly at coarse resolution. Fixed grid models, with nested grid representations of the grounding line, are able to generate accurate steady state positions, but can be inaccurate over transients. Only one full- Stokes model was included in the intercomparison, and consequently the accuracy of shelfy stream models as approximations of full-Stokes models remains to be determined in detail, especially during transients.

Domaines: Sciences de la Terre

F. Pattyn, C. Schoof, L. Perichon, R. C. A. Hindmarsh, E. Bueler, et al.. Results of the Marine Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison Project, MISMIP. The Cryosphere, 2012, 6, pp.573- 588. ⟨10.5194/tc-6-573-2012⟩. ⟨insu-00844423⟩