# How Do AI Climate Models Respond to Warming Across Climate Zones?

Preprint · Charlotte C. Merchant, Milan Klöwer, Bradley Stanley-Clamp, Maren Höver, Simon L. L. Michel, Edward Groot, Hannah M. Christensen

- Archive id: arxiv:2608.17986
- Published: 2026-08-18
- arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.17986
- Source URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.17986
- PDF: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2608.17986
- Provenance: arxiv

## Abstract

Regional climate zones are expected to shift under global warming. Whether AI climate models have learned to generalize climate-zone distributions under warming in a physically meaningful way affects their suitability for climate projection. We address this question by applying a Köppen-Geiger climate-zone decomposition to AIMIP Phase 1 models under prescribed +4K SST forcing and comparing their responses to physics-based AMIP models. Using this diagnostic, we compare baseline classification skill, per-zone responses in temperature, precipitation, and near-surface specific humidity, and the spatial structure of departures from physics-based models. All AI models considered reproduce the 1979-2014 ERA5 climatology within the physics-based models' range, but only the hybrid physics-AI model NeuralGCM-HRD reorganizes zones in agreement with established thermodynamic and hydrological scaling relations. The remaining emulators have distinct failure modes traceable to their architectural treatment of land cells. A physically consistent climate-zone response is therefore necessary for AI models intended for climate projection.

_Abstract reproduced under CC0-1.0 (arXiv descriptive metadata)._

---
Space Kitty Archive · https://space-kitty.com · API: https://space-kitty.com/api/v1 · MCP: https://space-kitty.com/mcp · Premium: $0.20/request via x402 (Base Sepolia (testnet)). Metadata: arXiv (CC0), OpenAlex (CC0), Europe PMC (CC BY/CC0 works), ClinicalTrials.gov.