Journal cover Journal topic
Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
Journal topic

Journal metrics

Journal metrics

  • IF value: 5.414 IF 5.414
  • IF 5-year value: 5.958 IF 5-year
    5.958
  • CiteScore value: 9.7 CiteScore
    9.7
  • SNIP value: 1.517 SNIP 1.517
  • IPP value: 5.61 IPP 5.61
  • SJR value: 2.601 SJR 2.601
  • Scimago H <br class='hide-on-tablet hide-on-mobile'>index value: 191 Scimago H
    index 191
  • h5-index value: 89 h5-index 89
ACP | Articles | Volume 18, issue 12
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 8873–8892, 2018
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-8873-2018
© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Special issue: The Modular Earth Submodel System (MESSy) (ACP/GMD inter-journal...

Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 8873–8892, 2018
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-8873-2018
© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Research article 25 Jun 2018

Research article | 25 Jun 2018

Comparison of ECHAM5/MESSy Atmospheric Chemistry (EMAC) simulations of the Arctic winter 2009/2010 and 2010/2011 with Envisat/MIPAS and Aura/MLS observations

Farahnaz Khosrawi et al.

Viewed

Total article views: 1,407 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
969 405 33 1,407 35 38
  • HTML: 969
  • PDF: 405
  • XML: 33
  • Total: 1,407
  • BibTeX: 35
  • EndNote: 38
Views and downloads (calculated since 22 Jan 2018)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 22 Jan 2018)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 1,410 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 1,403 with geography defined and 7 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 

Cited

Saved (final revised paper)

No saved metrics found.

Saved (preprint)

No saved metrics found.

Discussed (final revised paper)

No discussed metrics found.

Discussed (preprint)

No discussed metrics found.
Latest update: 02 Jul 2020
Publications Copernicus
Download
Short summary
An extensive assessment of the performance of the chemistry–climate model EMAC is given for Arctic winters 2009/2010 and 2010/2011. The EMAC simulations are compared to satellite observations. The comparisons between EMAC simulations and satellite observations show that model and measurements compare well for these two Arctic winters. However, differences between model and observations are found that need improvements in the model in the future.
An extensive assessment of the performance of the chemistry–climate model EMAC is given for...
Citation