legoESM: a modular, differentiable, multiscale, AI-ready Earth system model built with AI agents

Earth system models have grown tremendously in realism, yet key uncertainties persist in the climate response to greenhouse-gas forcing, particularly due to cloud radiative feedbacks. The new analysis still awaits peer review, but it already lays out the central claim clearly.

This matters because cosmology operates at the edge of what current instruments can measure, where systematic errors and model assumptions are never trivial. Small discrepancies between independent measurements have historically pointed toward missing physics rather than simple calibration errors, and the ongoing tension in the Hubble constant is a live example of how a persistent disagreement between methods can reshape the theoretical landscape. Each new dataset that approaches this territory with independent systematics adds real information to a problem that has resisted easy resolution for more than a decade. Earth system models (ESMs) have grown tremendously in realism, yet key uncertainties persist in the climate response to greenhouse-gas forcing, particularly due to cloud radiative. In addition, their software architecture was not designed for accelerator hardware or modern artificial intelligence (AI).

Here we present legoESM, a composable, differentiable, multiscale ESM written in JAX. It builds on decades of community-developed parameterizations and numerical methods, recast in a unified framework by AI coding agents under a human-specified scientific contract.

Dynamical cores, physics schemes, grids, complexity levels and components are swappable like building blocks, and can use conventional physics or machine-learned emulators. A single code base spans metre-scale large-eddy simulation to global simulations and weather to climate.

End-to-end differentiability enables gradient-based calibration, variational data assimilation and online training. LegoESM modular architecture enables systematic evaluation of diverse model variants to explore structural uncertainty and test hypotheses.

The relevance goes beyond one dataset because even small shifts in measured parameters can matter when the field is testing the limits of the standard cosmological model. The Lambda-CDM framework describes the observable universe with remarkable economy, but its success rests on two components, dark matter and dark energy, whose physical nature remains entirely unknown. Any credible measurement that tightens or loosens the constraints on those components moves the entire theoretical enterprise forward, regardless of whether the immediate result looks dramatic on its own terms.

LegoESM produces realistic simulations across scales, reduces land-surface temperature bias through gradient-based calibration, and scales efficiently on GPUs to kilometer-scale. It offers an open, community infrastructure for hypothesis testing, research and teaching in Earth sciences and a template for multiscale physical systems.

Because this is still a preprint, the result should be read with genuine interest and proportionate caution. Peer review is not a guarantee of correctness, but it is a process that forces authors to respond to technical criticism from specialists who have no stake in a particular outcome. Preprints that survive that process, often with substantive revisions, emerge with a stronger evidential base than the version that first appeared. Until that stage is complete, the responsible reading keeps uncertainty explicitly visible rather than treating the claims as established findings.

The next step is to see whether the effect survives when independent surveys, different calibration strategies and tighter control of systematic uncertainties enter the picture. Programmes such as Euclid, DESI and the Rubin Observatory will deliver datasets over the next several years that cover the same parameter space with largely independent methods. If the current signal persists through those tests, its theoretical implications will become impossible to set aside. Until peer review and independent follow-up address those open questions, skepticism is not a failure of appreciation for the work; it is part of how science decides what to keep.

Source