The simulations with economic uncertainty discussed in section 4b of Sokolov et al. (2009) were, by mistake, carried out with the mean values of the input climate parameters instead of the intended median values. While this mistake did not affect the resulting distributions of atmospheric CO2 and radiative forcing, it led to an upward shift in the distributions for the changes in surface air temperature (SAT) and sea level rise. Correct distributions are shown in Table 1 and in the revised version of Fig. 11. The ratios of the percentiles to the mean shown in Table 2 of Sokolov et al. (2009) did not change
International audienceIn the version of this Article originally published, data given for total exce...
The authors regret that Fig. 9b in this article incorrectly repeated the RANS results already shown ...
International audienceUnfortunately, in the aforementioned contribution, Fig. 5 (Monthly multi-model...
Author Posting. © American Meteorological Society, 2010. This article is posted here by permission ...
In the version of this Article originally published, a coding error resulted in the erroneous inclus...
In Table 2 of Elsbury et al. (2019), titled "The atmospheric response to positive IPV, positive AMV,...
Parameter table for the corrigendum of the paper "All options, not silver bullets, needed to limit g...
The authors regret that a typo has been made in Table 4 and Appendix 1 to this paper. The coefficien...
There is an error in figures 1, 2, and 3 (corresponding to Figures 1, 4 and 5 of the original public...
This article was published in GCB (2016/22:2462–2474). The authors of the paper ‘Modelling marine co...
Carriero, Clark, and Marcellino (2018, CCM2018) used a large BVAR model with a factor structure to s...
The authors regret that a typo has been made in Table 4 and Appendix 1 to this paper. The coefficien...
International audienceIn the version of this Article originally published, data given for total exce...
The authors regret that Fig. 9b in this article incorrectly repeated the RANS results already shown ...
International audienceUnfortunately, in the aforementioned contribution, Fig. 5 (Monthly multi-model...
Author Posting. © American Meteorological Society, 2010. This article is posted here by permission ...
In the version of this Article originally published, a coding error resulted in the erroneous inclus...
In Table 2 of Elsbury et al. (2019), titled "The atmospheric response to positive IPV, positive AMV,...
Parameter table for the corrigendum of the paper "All options, not silver bullets, needed to limit g...
The authors regret that a typo has been made in Table 4 and Appendix 1 to this paper. The coefficien...
There is an error in figures 1, 2, and 3 (corresponding to Figures 1, 4 and 5 of the original public...
This article was published in GCB (2016/22:2462–2474). The authors of the paper ‘Modelling marine co...
Carriero, Clark, and Marcellino (2018, CCM2018) used a large BVAR model with a factor structure to s...
The authors regret that a typo has been made in Table 4 and Appendix 1 to this paper. The coefficien...
International audienceIn the version of this Article originally published, data given for total exce...
The authors regret that Fig. 9b in this article incorrectly repeated the RANS results already shown ...
International audienceUnfortunately, in the aforementioned contribution, Fig. 5 (Monthly multi-model...