This study made an intercomparison of two model climates, simulated by a unified weather-climate model system (GRIST), under the Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project (AMIP) experimental protocol. These two model AMIP simulations with PhysW and PhysC (AMIPW and AMIPC hereafter) are configured with different physics suites, but both generated by a unified dynamical core framework. PhysW and PhysC are originally designed for weather forecasting and climate simulation, respectively. Both AMIPW and AMIPC reach statistical equilibrium in the climate integration. They overall produce comparable model climates, while distinctive bias features also exist. Compared with the AMIP experiments of 54 climate models from CMIP6, both AMIPW and AMIPC demonstrate competitive performances in the mean state simulations. They capture the observed spatial distribution of large-scale circulation and precipitation, as well as replicate the seasonal migration and primary frequency-intensity structures of precipitation. However, due to different parameterization schemes such as convection and microphysics being utilized, the most notable differences between the models lie in processes related to moist physics. For instance, AMIPW tends to overestimate (underestimate) global shortwave (longwave) cloud radiative forcing, while AMIPC provides a more balanced estimation, with a significantly stronger longwave cloud radiative forcing over the tropics. In addition, AMIPC well reproduces cloud fraction and liquid content but underestimates cloud ice water content, whereas AMIPW significantly overestimates all these variables. Overall, the similarity between two model climates is higher than their discrepancy. The results demonstrate that the extent to which the selection of two distinct physics suites can influence the simulated model climate, within a unified model system.

本研究根据大气模式比对项目（AMIP）实验协议，对由统一天气气候模型系统（GRIST）模拟的两种模式气候进行了比对。这两个使用 PhysW 和 PhysC（以下简称 AMIPW 和 AMIPC）的 AMIP 模拟模型配置了不同的物理套件，但均由统一的动态核心框架生成。 PhysW 和 PhysC 最初分别是为天气预报和气候模拟而设计的。 AMIPW 和 AMIPC 在气候一体化方面都达到了统计平衡。它们总体上产生了可比的模型气候，同时也存在独特的偏差特征。与 CMIP6 的 54 个气候模型的 AMIP 实验相比，AMIPW 和 AMIPC 在平均状态模拟中都表现出了有竞争力的性能。它们捕获了观测到的大规模环流和降水的空间分布，并复制了降水的季节性迁移和主要频率-强度结构。然而，由于使用了不同的参数化方案，例如对流和微物理，模型之间最显着的差异在于与潮湿物理相关的过程。例如，AMIPW 倾向于高估（低估）全球短波（长波）云辐射强迫，而 AMIPC 提供更平衡的估计，热带地区的长波云辐射强迫明显更强。此外，AMIPC 很好地再现了云分数和液体含量，但低估了云冰水含量，而 AMIPW 显着高估了所有这些变量。总体而言，两种模式气候之间的相似性高于差异性。结果表明，在统一的模型系统中，选择两个不同的物理套件可以在多大程度上影响模拟的模型气候。