scholarly journals An improved statistical bias correction method that also corrects dry climate models

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabian Lehner ◽  
Imran Nadeem ◽  
Herbert Formayer
Keyword(s):  
Observational Data ◽  
Bias Correction ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Meteorological Data ◽  
Climate Impact ◽  
Climate Change Signal ◽  
Historical Period ◽  
Statistical Bias ◽  
Model Data ◽  
Direct Model

Abstract. Daily meteorological data from climate models is needed for many climate impact studies, e.g. in hydrology or agriculture but direct model output can contain large systematic errors. Thus, statistical bias correcting is applied to correct the raw model data. However, up to now no method has been introduced that fulfills the following demands simultaneously: (1) The long term climatological trends (climate change signal) should not be altered during bias correction, (2) the model data should match the observational data in the historical period as accurate as possible in a climatological sense and (3) models with too little wet days (precipitation above 0.1 mm) should be corrected accurately, which means that the wet day frequency is conserved. We improve the already existing quantile mapping approach so that it satisfies all three conditions. Our new method is called empirical percentile–percentile mapping (EPPM) which uses empirical distributions for meteorological variables and is therefore computationally inexpensive. The correction of precipitation is particularly challenging so our main focus is on precipitation. EPPM corrects the historical model data so that precipitation sums and wet days are equal to the observational data.

scholarly journals Evaluating quantile-based bias adjustment methods for climate change scenarios

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabian Lehner ◽  
Imran Nadeem ◽  
Herbert Formayer
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Meteorological Data ◽  
Climate Change Signal ◽  
Historical Period ◽  
Climate Change Scenarios ◽  
Statistical Bias ◽  
Bias Adjustment ◽  
Direct Model

Abstract. Daily meteorological data such as temperature or precipitation from climate models is needed for many climate impact studies, e.g. in hydrology or agriculture but direct model output can contain large systematic errors. Thus, statistical bias adjustment is applied to correct climate model outputs. Here we review existing statistical bias adjustment methods and their shortcomings, and present a method which we call EQA (Empirical Quantile Adjustment), a development of the methods EDCDFm and PresRAT. We then test it in comparison to two existing methods using real and artificially created daily temperature and precipitation data for Austria. We compare the performance of the three methods in terms of the following demands: (1): The model data should match the climatological means of the observational data in the historical period. (2): The long-term climatological trends of means (climate change signal), either defined as difference or as ratio, should not be altered during bias adjustment, and (3): Even models with too few wet days (precipitation above 0.1 mm) should be corrected accurately, so that the wet day frequency is conserved. EQA fulfills (1) almost exactly and (2) at least for temperature. For precipitation, an additional correction included in EQA assures that the climate change signal is conserved, and for (3), we apply another additional algorithm to add precipitation days.

scholarly journals Effects of Bias-Correcting Climate Model Data on the Projection of Future Changes in High Flows

Hydrology ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vanessa Wörner ◽  
Phillip Kreye ◽  
Günter Meon
Keyword(s):  
Bias Correction ◽  
Goodness Of Fit ◽  
Hydrological Modeling ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Correction Method ◽  
Climate Impact ◽  
Historical Period ◽  
Northwestern Part ◽  
Model Data ◽  
High Flows

Bias-correction methods are commonly applied to climate model data in hydrological climate impact studies. This is due to the often large deviations between simulated and observed climate variables. These biases may cause unrealistic simulation results when directly using the climate model data as input for hydrological models. Our analysis of the EURO-CORDEX (Coordinated Downscaling Experiment for Europe) data for the Northwestern part of Germany showed substantial biases for all climatological input variables needed by the hydrological model PANTA RHEI. The sensitivity for climatological input data demonstrated that changes in only one climate variable significantly affect the simulated average discharge and mean annual peak flow. The application of bias correction methods of different complexity on the climate model data improved the plausibility of hydrological modeling results for the historical period 1971–2000. The projections for the future period 2069–2099 for high flows indicate on average small changes for representative concentration pathway (RCP) 4.5 and an increase of approximately 10% for RCP8.5 when applying non-bias corrected climate model data. These values significantly differed when applying bias correction. The bias correction methods were evaluated in terms of their ability to (a) maintain the change signal for precipitation and (b) the goodness of fit for hydrological parameters for the historical period. Our results for this evaluation indicated that no bias correction method can explicitly be preferred over the others.

scholarly journals New Approach for Bias Correction and Stochastic Downscaling of Future Projections for Daily Mean Temperatures to a High-Resolution Grid

2019 ◽  
Vol 58 (12) ◽  
pp. 2617-2632 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qifen Yuan ◽  
Thordis L. Thorarinsdottir ◽  
Stein Beldring ◽  
Wai Kwok Wong ◽  
Shaochun Huang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Resolution ◽  
Bias Correction ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Regional Climate ◽  
Regional Climate Models ◽  
Climate Change Signal ◽  
Climate Projections ◽  
Data Product ◽  
Temporal Features ◽  
Stochastic Downscaling

AbstractIn applications of climate information, coarse-resolution climate projections commonly need to be downscaled to a finer grid. One challenge of this requirement is the modeling of subgrid variability and the spatial and temporal dependence at the finer scale. Here, a postprocessing procedure for temperature projections is proposed that addresses this challenge. The procedure employs statistical bias correction and stochastic downscaling in two steps. In the first step, errors that are related to spatial and temporal features of the first two moments of the temperature distribution at model scale are identified and corrected. Second, residual space–time dependence at the finer scale is analyzed using a statistical model, from which realizations are generated and then combined with an appropriate climate change signal to form the downscaled projection fields. Using a high-resolution observational gridded data product, the proposed approach is applied in a case study in which projections of two regional climate models from the Coordinated Downscaling Experiment–European Domain (EURO-CORDEX) ensemble are bias corrected and downscaled to a 1 km × 1 km grid in the Trøndelag area of Norway. A cross-validation study shows that the proposed procedure generates results that better reflect the marginal distributional properties of the data product and have better consistency in space and time when compared with empirical quantile mapping.

Impact of aerosols on the future Euro-Mediterranean climate: results from the CORDEX FPS-Aerosol

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pierre Nabat ◽  
Samuel Somot ◽  
Lola Corre ◽  
Eleni Katragkou ◽  
Shuping Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mediterranean Climate ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Regional Climate ◽  
Regional Climate Models ◽  
Surface Radiation ◽  
Climate Change Signal ◽  
Historical Period ◽  
Future Evolution ◽  
Aerosol Forcing ◽  
The Future

<p>The Euro-Mediterranean region is subject to numerous and various aerosol loads, which interact with radiation, clouds and atmospheric dynamics, with ensuing impact on regional climate. However up to now, aerosol variations are hardly taken into account in most regional climate simulations, although anthropogenic emissions have been dramatically reduced in Europe since the 1980s. Moreover, inconsistencies between regional climate models (RCMs) and their driving global model (GCM) have recently been identified in terms of future radiation and temperature evolution, which could be related to the differences in aerosol forcing. <br>The present study aims at assessing the role of aerosols in the future evolution of the Euro-Mediterranean climate, using a specific multi-model protocol carried out in the Flagship Pilot Study "Aerosol" of the CORDEX program. This protocol relies on three simulations for each RCM: a historical run (1971-2000) and two future RCP8.5 simulations (2021-2050), a first one with evolving aerosols, and a second one with the same aerosols as in the historical period. Six modeling groups have taken part in this protocol, providing nine triplets of simulations. The analysis of these simulations will be presented here. First results show that the future evolution of aerosols has a significant impact on the evolution of surface radiation and surface temperature. In addition RCM runs taking into account the evolution of aerosols are simulating climate change signal closer to the one of their driving GCM than those with constant aerosols.</p>

scholarly journals Effects of climate model radiation, humidity and wind estimates on hydrological simulations

2012 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 305-318 ◽  
Author(s):  
I. Haddeland ◽  
J. Heinke ◽  
F. Voß ◽  
S. Eisner ◽  
C. Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bias Correction ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Meteorological Data ◽  
Correction Method ◽  
Hydrological Models ◽  
Temperature And Precipitation ◽  
Effects Of Radiation ◽  
Precipitation And Temperature

Abstract. Due to biases in the output of climate models, a bias correction is often needed to make the output suitable for use in hydrological simulations. In most cases only the temperature and precipitation values are bias corrected. However, often there are also biases in other variables such as radiation, humidity and wind speed. In this study we tested to what extent it is also needed to bias correct these variables. Responses to radiation, humidity and wind estimates from two climate models for four large-scale hydrological models are analysed. For the period 1971–2000 these hydrological simulations are compared to simulations using meteorological data based on observations and reanalysis; i.e. the baseline simulation. In both forcing datasets originating from climate models precipitation and temperature are bias corrected to the baseline forcing dataset. Hence, it is only effects of radiation, humidity and wind estimates that are tested here. The direct use of climate model outputs result in substantial different evapotranspiration and runoff estimates, when compared to the baseline simulations. A simple bias correction method is implemented and tested by rerunning the hydrological models using bias corrected radiation, humidity and wind values. The results indicate that bias correction can successfully be used to match the baseline simulations. Finally, historical (1971–2000) and future (2071–2100) model simulations resulting from using bias corrected forcings are compared to the results using non-bias corrected forcings. The relative changes in simulated evapotranspiration and runoff are relatively similar for the bias corrected and non bias corrected hydrological projections, although the absolute evapotranspiration and runoff numbers are often very different. The simulated relative and absolute differences when using bias corrected and non bias corrected climate model radiation, humidity and wind values are, however, smaller than literature reported differences resulting from using bias corrected and non bias corrected climate model precipitation and temperature values.

scholarly journals Are we using the right fuel to drive hydrological models? A climate impact study in the Upper Blue Nile

2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 2163-2185 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Liersch ◽  
Julia Tecklenburg ◽  
Henning Rust ◽  
Andreas Dobler ◽  
Madlen Fischer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Bias Correction ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Regional Climate ◽  
Model Performance ◽  
Climate Impact ◽  
Hydrological Models ◽  
Blue Nile ◽  
Projected Change ◽  
Model Ensembles

Abstract. Climate simulations are the fuel to drive hydrological models that are used to assess the impacts of climate change and variability on hydrological parameters, such as river discharges, soil moisture, and evapotranspiration. Unlike with cars, where we know which fuel the engine requires, we never know in advance what unexpected side effects might be caused by the fuel we feed our models with. Sometimes we increase the fuel's octane number (bias correction) to achieve better performance and find out that the model behaves differently but not always as was expected or desired. This study investigates the impacts of projected climate change on the hydrology of the Upper Blue Nile catchment using two model ensembles consisting of five global CMIP5 Earth system models and 10 regional climate models (CORDEX Africa). WATCH forcing data were used to calibrate an eco-hydrological model and to bias-correct both model ensembles using slightly differing approaches. On the one hand it was found that the bias correction methods considerably improved the performance of average rainfall characteristics in the reference period (1970–1999) in most of the cases. This also holds true for non-extreme discharge conditions between Q20 and Q80. On the other hand, bias-corrected simulations tend to overemphasize magnitudes of projected change signals and extremes. A general weakness of both uncorrected and bias-corrected simulations is the rather poor representation of high and low flows and their extremes, which were often deteriorated by bias correction. This inaccuracy is a crucial deficiency for regional impact studies dealing with water management issues and it is therefore important to analyse model performance and characteristics and the effect of bias correction, and eventually to exclude some climate models from the ensemble. However, the multi-model means of all ensembles project increasing average annual discharges in the Upper Blue Nile catchment and a shift in seasonal patterns, with decreasing discharges in June and July and increasing discharges from August to November.

Climate Model Biases and Modification of the Climate Change Signal by Intensity-Dependent Bias Correction

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (16) ◽  
pp. 6591-6610 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Aleksandrov Ivanov ◽  
Jürg Luterbacher ◽  
Sven Kotlarski
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Bias Correction ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Daily Precipitation ◽  
Analytical Description ◽  
Analytical Theory ◽  
Climate Change Signal ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Model Biases

Climate change impact research and risk assessment require accurate estimates of the climate change signal (CCS). Raw climate model data include systematic biases that affect the CCS of high-impact variables such as daily precipitation and wind speed. This paper presents a novel, general, and extensible analytical theory of the effect of these biases on the CCS of the distribution mean and quantiles. The theory reveals that misrepresented model intensities and probability of nonzero (positive) events have the potential to distort raw model CCS estimates. We test the analytical description in a challenging application of bias correction and downscaling to daily precipitation over alpine terrain, where the output of 15 regional climate models (RCMs) is reduced to local weather stations. The theoretically predicted CCS modification well approximates the modification by the bias correction method, even for the station–RCM combinations with the largest absolute modifications. These results demonstrate that the CCS modification by bias correction is a direct consequence of removing model biases. Therefore, provided that application of intensity-dependent bias correction is scientifically appropriate, the CCS modification should be a desirable effect. The analytical theory can be used as a tool to 1) detect model biases with high potential to distort the CCS and 2) efficiently generate novel, improved CCS datasets. The latter are highly relevant for the development of appropriate climate change adaptation, mitigation, and resilience strategies. Future research needs to focus on developing process-based bias corrections that depend on simulated intensities rather than preserving the raw model CCS.

Climate model bias correction for nonstationary conditions

2020 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 326-336
Author(s):  
Mohammad Madani ◽  
Vinod Chilkoti ◽  
Tirupati Bolisetti ◽  
Rajesh Seth
Keyword(s):  
Bias Correction ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Regional Climate ◽  
Bias Reduction ◽  
Historical Period ◽  
Monthly Precipitation ◽  
Model Bias ◽  
New Methods ◽  
Climate Model Bias

In most of the climate change impact assessment studies, climate model bias is considered to be stationary between the control and scenario periods. Few methods are found in the literature that addresses the issue of nonstationarity in correcting the bias. To overcome the shortcomings reported in these approaches, three new methods of bias correction (NBC_μ, NBC_σ, and NBC_bs) are presented. The methods are improvised versions of previous techniques relying on distribution mapping. The methods are tested using split sample approach over 50-year historical period for nine climate stations in Ontario, using six regional climate models. The average bias reduction improvement by new methods, in mean daily and monthly precipitation, was found to be 73.9%, 74.3%, and 77.4%, respectively, higher than that obtained by the previous methods (eQM 67.7% and CNCDFm_NP 64.1%). Thus, the methods are found to be more effective in accounting for nonstationarity in the model bias.

scholarly journals Spectral representation of the annual cycle in the climate change signal

2011 ◽  
Vol 15 (9) ◽  
pp. 2777-2788 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Bosshard ◽  
S. Kotlarski ◽  
T. Ewen ◽  
C. Schär
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Annual Cycle ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Climate Impact ◽  
Climate Change Signal ◽  
Climate Change Scenarios ◽  
Regional Climate Model Output ◽  
Spectral Smoothing ◽  
Precipitation Changes

Abstract. The annual cycle of temperature and precipitation changes as projected by climate models is of fundamental interest in climate impact studies. Its estimation, however, is impaired by natural variability. Using a simple form of the delta change method, we show that on regional scales relevant for hydrological impact models, the projected changes in the annual cycle are prone to sampling artefacts. For precipitation at station locations, these artefacts may have amplitudes that are comparable to the climate change signal itself. Therefore, the annual cycle of the climate change signal should be filtered when generating climate change scenarios. We test a spectral smoothing method to remove the artificial fluctuations. Comparison against moving monthly averages shows that sampling artefacts in the climate change signal can successfully be removed by spectral smoothing. The method is tested at Swiss climate stations and applied to regional climate model output of the ENSEMBLES project. The spectral method performs well, except in cases with a strong annual cycle and large relative precipitation changes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document