\relax 
\citation{levitus_anthropogenic_2001}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {1}Introduction}{1}}
\newlabel{intro}{{1}{1}}
\citation{hansen_earths_2005}
\citation{meehl_wcrp_2007}
\citation{trenberth_global_2009}
\newlabel{metric}{{1}{2}}
\citation{meehl_wcrp_2007}
\citation{gonzalez_digital_2002}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {2}Data: GCM CO$_2$ ramping experiments}{3}}
\newlabel{data}{{2}{3}}
\citation{forster_climate_2006}
\citation{forster_climate_2006}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {3}Method: Linear feedback model}{4}}
\newlabel{methods}{{3}{4}}
\newlabel{feedbackeqn}{{2}{4}}
\newlabel{balanceeqn}{{3}{4}}
\newlabel{modeleqn}{{4}{4}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {4}Linear feedback model experiments}{5}}
\newlabel{experiments}{{4}{5}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {5}Summary and discussion}{5}}
\newlabel{discussion}{{5}{5}}
\citation{trenberth_global_2009}
\citation{donohoe_atmospheric_2011}
\citation{trenberth_global_2009}
\citation{forster_climate_2006}
\citation{forster_climate_2006}
\bibstyle{spbasic}
\bibdata{toarad}
\bibcite{donohoe_atmospheric_2011}{Donohoe and Battisti(2011)}
\@writefile{lot}{\contentsline {table}{\numberline {1}{\ignorespaces LW and SW feedbacks and ratio of SW to net TOA integrated imbalance ($F_{SW}$) for each GCM.}}{6}}
\newlabel{tab:feedback}{{1}{6}}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {1}{\ignorespaces (A) Idealized response of radiation at the top of atmosphere to an instantaneous greenhouse forcing of 2.5 W m$^{-2}$ assuming a radiative adjustment e-folding time of 20 years. The shaded red area is the longwave energy accumulation. (B) As in (A) but in response to an instantaneous SW increase of 2.5 W m$^{-2}$. In this case, the net energy accumulation is the difference between the SW energy accumulation (the shaded blue area) and the LW increase (the hatched red area where the hatching indicates that the LW response leads to a cooling of the climate system). The CMIP3 ensemble average radiative response in the 1\% CO$_{2}$ increase to doubling experiments. The shaded area represent the energy accumulation by SW (blue) and LW (red) anomalies and the hatched red area indicates energy loss by LW processes.}}{7}}
\newlabel{fig:cartoon}{{1}{7}}
\bibcite{forster_climate_2006}{Forster and Taylor(2006)}
\bibcite{gonzalez_digital_2002}{Gonzalez and Woods(2002)}
\bibcite{hansen_earths_2005}{Hansen et\nobreakspace  {}al(2005)Hansen, Nazarenko, Ruedy, Sato, Willis, Del\nobreakspace  {}Genio, Koch, Lacis, Lo, Menon, Novakov, Perlwitz, Russell, Schmidt, and Tausnev}
\bibcite{levitus_anthropogenic_2001}{Levitus et\nobreakspace  {}al(2001)Levitus, Antonov, Wang, Delworth, Dixon, and Broccoli}
\bibcite{meehl_wcrp_2007}{Meehl et\nobreakspace  {}al(2007)Meehl, Covey, Taylor, Delworth, Stouffer, Latif, {McAvaney}, and Mitchell}
\bibcite{trenberth_global_2009}{Trenberth and Fasullo(2009)}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {2}{\ignorespaces Global-, ensemble- mean TOA SW, LW, and net radiative imbalance and forcings (from \cite  {forster_climate_2006}) for 1\% per year to CO$_2$ doubling experiment. Radiative imbalance curves are smoothed with three passes of a 1-2-1 filter. }}{8}}
\newlabel{fig:ensmeanrad}{{2}{8}}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {3}{\ignorespaces The heat capacity (time-dependent, ensemble mean, solid blue line) is the ratio of the integrated ensemble-mean TOA energy imbalance to global mean surface temperature change (dashed blue line) and the change in surface temperature relative to the beginning of the ramping (green line, note different $y$-axis). Energy balance and temperature change are smoothed with three passes of a 1-2-1 filter before calculation.}}{9}}
\newlabel{fig:heff}{{3}{9}}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {4}{\ignorespaces Timeseries of SW and LW radiation from CMIP3 models (solid lines) and using the linear feedback model of equation 4\hbox {} (dashed lines). Feedback values are calculated for each model separately; the heat capacity is the same for all models (see Fig. 3\hbox {}). Mean absolute error of the model for the LW and SW curves over the last ten years is shown in each panel.}}{10}}
\newlabel{fig:model}{{4}{10}}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {5}{\ignorespaces Mean absolute error of the SW (top) and LW (bottom) curves (shown in Fig. 4\hbox {}) over the last 10 years of ramping of linear feedback model for CMIP3 GCMs. Four different setups for the model are: LW and SW feedbacks calculated individually for each GCM, ensemble mean LW feedback but individual SW feedbacks, ensemble mean SW feedback and individual LW feedbacks, and ensemble mean SW and LW feedbacks. Each bar represents the error for one GCM, and the GCMs are sorted by their SW feedback. }}{11}}
\newlabel{fig:modelerror}{{5}{11}}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {6}{\ignorespaces The fraction of TOA imbalance in the SW at the time of CO$_2$ doubling for the linear feedback model (contours) as a function of LW and SW feedbacks. Circles show the location of each CMIP3 model in LW- versus SW-feedback space, and the color of the dots shows the fraction of imbalance in the SW. }}{11}}
\newlabel{fig:ratioplot}{{6}{11}}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {7}{\ignorespaces 3 balls }}{11}}
\newlabel{fig:3balls}{{7}{11}}