Sudden stratospheric warmings (SSWs) are large, rapid temperature rises in the winter polar stratosphere, occurring predominantly in the Northern Hemisphere. Major SSWs are also associated with a reversal of the climatological westerly zonal-mean zonal winds. Circulation anomalies associated with SSWs can descend into the troposphere with substantial surface weather impacts, such as wintertime extreme cold air outbreaks. After their discovery in 1952, SSWs were classified by the World Meteorological Organization. An examination of literature suggests that a single, original reference for an exact definition of SSWs is elusive, but in many references a definition involves the reversal of the meridional temperature gradient and, for major warmings, the reversal of the zonal circulation poleward of 60° latitude at 10 hPa. Though versions of this definition are still commonly used to detect SSWs, the details of the definition and its implementation remain ambiguous. In addition, other SSW definitions have been used in the last few decades, resulting in inconsistent classification of SSW events. We seek to answer the questions: How has the SSW definition changed, and how sensitive is the detection of SSWs to the definition used? For what kind of analysis is a “standard” definition useful? We argue that a standard SSW definition is necessary for maintaining a consistent and robust metric to assess polar stratospheric wintertime variability in climate models and other statistical applications. To provide a basis for, and to encourage participation in, a communitywide discussion currently underway, we explore what criteria are important for a standard definition and propose possible ways to update the definition.

The climate research community uses atmospheric reanalysis data sets to understand a wide range of processes and variability in the atmosphere, yet different reanalyses may give very different results for the same diagnostics. The Stratosphere–troposphere Processes And their Role in Climate (SPARC) Reanalysis Intercomparison Project (S-RIP) is a coordinated activity to compare reanalysis data sets using a variety of key diagnostics. The objectives of this project are to identify differences among reanalyses and understand their underlying causes, to provide guidance on appropriate usage of various reanalysis products in scientific studies, particularly those of relevance to SPARC, and to contribute to future improvements in the reanalysis products by establishing collaborative links between reanalysis centres and data users. The project focuses predominantly on differences among reanalyses, although studies that include operational analyses and studies comparing reanalyses with observations are also included when appropriate. The emphasis is on diagnostics of the upper troposphere, stratosphere, and lower mesosphere. This paper summarizes the motivation and goals of the S-RIP activity and extensively reviews key technical aspects of the reanalysis data sets that are the focus of this activity. The special issue The SPARC Reanalysis Intercomparison Project (S-RIP) in this journal serves to collect research with relevance to the S-RIP in preparation for the publication of the planned two (interim and full) S-RIP reports.

We describe the main differences in simulations of stratospheric climate and variability by models within the fifth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) that have a model top above the stratopause and relatively fine stratospheric vertical resolution (high‐top), and those that have a model top below the stratopause (low‐top). Although the simulation of mean stratospheric climate by the two model ensembles is similar, the low‐top model ensemble has very weak stratospheric variability on daily and interannual time scales. The frequency of major sudden stratospheric warming events is strongly underestimated by the low‐top models with less than half the frequency of events observed in the reanalysis data and high‐top models. The lack of stratospheric variability in the low‐top models affects their stratosphere‐troposphere coupling, resulting in short‐lived anomalies in the Northern Annular Mode, which do not produce long‐lasting tropospheric impacts, as seen in observations. The lack of stratospheric variability, however, does not appear to have any impact on the ability of the low‐top models to reproduce past stratospheric temperature trends. We find little improvement in the simulation of decadal variability for the high‐top models compared to the low‐top, which is likely related to the fact that neither ensemble produces a realistic dynamical response to volcanic eruptions.