scholarly journals Effects of univariate and multivariate bias correction on hydrological impact projections in alpine catchments

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 1339-1354 ◽  
Author(s):  
Judith Meyer ◽  
Irene Kohn ◽  
Kerstin Stahl ◽  
Kirsti Hakala ◽  
Jan Seibert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Air Temperature ◽  
Bias Correction ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Climate Variables ◽  
Quantile Mapping ◽  
Impact Studies ◽  
Temperature And Precipitation ◽  
Hydrological Impact ◽  
Individual Variables ◽  
Alpine Catchments

Abstract. Alpine catchments show a high sensitivity to climate variation as they include the elevation range of the snow line. Therefore, the correct representation of climate variables and their interdependence is crucial when describing or predicting hydrological processes. When using climate model simulations in hydrological impact studies, forcing meteorological data are usually downscaled and bias corrected, most often by univariate approaches such as quantile mapping of individual variables, neglecting the relationships that exist between climate variables. In this study we test the hypothesis that the explicit consideration of the relation between air temperature and precipitation will affect hydrological impact modelling in a snow-dominated mountain environment. Glacio-hydrological simulations were performed for two partly glacierized alpine catchments using a recently developed multivariate bias correction method to post-process EURO-CORDEX regional climate model outputs between 1976 and 2099. These simulations were compared to those obtained by using the common univariate quantile mapping for bias correction. As both methods correct each climate variable's distribution in the same way, the marginal distributions of the individual variables show no differences. Yet, regarding the interdependence of precipitation and air temperature, clear differences are notable in the studied catchments. Simultaneous correction based on the multivariate approach led to more precipitation below air temperatures of 0 ∘C and therefore more simulated snowfall than with the data of the univariate approach. This difference translated to considerable consequences for the hydrological responses of the catchments. The multivariate bias-correction-forced simulations showed distinctly different results for projected snow cover characteristics, snowmelt-driven streamflow components, and expected glacier disappearance dates. In all aspects – the fraction of precipitation above and below 0 ∘C, the simulated snow water equivalents, glacier volumes, and the streamflow regime – simulations resulting from the multivariate-corrected data corresponded better with reference data than the results of univariate bias correction. Differences in simulated total streamflow due to the different bias correction approaches may be considered negligible given the generally large spread of the projections, but systematic differences in the seasonally delayed streamflow components from snowmelt in particular will matter from a planning perspective. While this study does not allow conclusive evidence that multivariate bias correction approaches are generally preferable, it clearly demonstrates that incorporating or ignoring inter-variable relationships between air temperature and precipitation data can impact the conclusions drawn in hydrological climate change impact studies in snow-dominated environments.

scholarly journals Effects of univariate and multivariate bias correction on hydrological impact projections in alpine catchments

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Judith Meyer ◽  
Irene Kohn ◽  
Kerstin Stahl ◽  
Kirsti Hakala ◽  
Jan Seibert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Air Temperature ◽  
Bias Correction ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Historical Period ◽  
Climate Variables ◽  
Quantile Mapping ◽  
Impact Studies ◽  
Hydrological Impact ◽  
Individual Variables ◽  
Alpine Catchments

Abstract. Alpine catchments show a high sensitivity to climate variation as they include the elevation range of the snow line. Therefore, the correct representation of climate variables and their interdependence is crucial when describing or predicting hydrological processes. When using climate model simulations in hydrological impact studies, forcing meteorological data are usually downscaled and bias corrected, most often by univariate approaches such as quantile mapping of individual variables. However, univariate correction neglects the relationships that exist between climate variables. In this study glacio-hydrological simulations were performed for two partly glacierized alpine catchments using a recently developed multivariate bias correction method to post-process EURO-CORDEX regional climate model outputs between 1976 and 2100. These simulations were compared to those obtained by using the common univariate quantile mapping for bias correction. As both methods correct each climate variable’s distribution in the same way, the marginal distributions of the individual variables show no differences. Yet, regarding the interdependence of precipitation and air temperature, clear differences are notable in the studied catchments. Simultaneous correction based on the multivariate approach lead to more precipitation below air temperatures of 0 °C and therefore more simulated snowfall than with the data of the univariate approach. This difference translated to considerable consequences for the hydrological responses of the catchments. The multivariate bias correction forced simulations showed distinctly different results for projected snow cover characteristics, snowmelt-driven streamflow components, and expected glacier disappearance dates in the future. For the historical period the fraction of precipitation above and below 0 °C, the simulated snow water equivalents, glacier volumes, and the streamflow regime resulting from the multivariate-corrected data corresponded better with reference data than the results of univariate bias correction. Differences in simulated total streamflow due to the different bias correction approaches may be considered negligible given the generally large spread of the projections, but systematic differences in the seasonally delayed streamflow components from snowmelt in particular will matter from a planning perspective. While this study does not allow concluding definitively that multivariate bias correction approaches are generally preferable, it clearly demonstrates that incorporating or ignoring inter-variable relationships between air temperature and precipitation data can impact the conclusions drawn in hydrological climate change impact studies.

scholarly journals Scaled distribution mapping: a bias correction method that preserves raw climate model projected changes

2017 ◽  
Vol 21 (6) ◽  
pp. 2649-2666 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew B. Switanek ◽  
Peter A. Troch ◽  
Christopher L. Castro ◽  
Armin Leuprecht ◽  
Hsin-I Chang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Error Correction ◽  
Bias Correction ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Correction Method ◽  
Climate Change Signal ◽  
Quantile Mapping ◽  
Temperature And Precipitation ◽  
Distribution Mapping ◽  
Projected Changes ◽  
Time Invariant

Abstract. Commonly used bias correction methods such as quantile mapping (QM) assume the function of error correction values between modeled and observed distributions are stationary or time invariant. This article finds that this function of the error correction values cannot be assumed to be stationary. As a result, QM lacks justification to inflate/deflate various moments of the climate change signal. Previous adaptations of QM, most notably quantile delta mapping (QDM), have been developed that do not rely on this assumption of stationarity. Here, we outline a methodology called scaled distribution mapping (SDM), which is conceptually similar to QDM, but more explicitly accounts for the frequency of rain days and the likelihood of individual events. The SDM method is found to outperform QM, QDM, and detrended QM in its ability to better preserve raw climate model projected changes to meteorological variables such as temperature and precipitation.

scholarly journals High-resolution Med-CORDEX regional climate model simulations for hydrological impact studies: a first evaluation in Morocco

2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 5687-5737 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y. Tramblay ◽  
D. Ruelland ◽  
S. Somot ◽  
R. Bouaicha ◽  
E. Servat
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
High Resolution ◽  
Regional Climate Model ◽  
Bias Correction ◽  
Hydrological Model ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Regional Climate ◽  
Impact Studies ◽  
Hydrological Impact ◽  
Split Sample

Abstract. In the framework of the international CORDEX program, new regional climate model (RCM) simulations at high spatial resolutions are becoming available for the Mediterranean region (Med-CORDEX initiative). This study provides the first evaluation for hydrological impact studies of these high-resolution simulations. Different approaches are compared to analyze the climate change impacts on the hydrology of a catchment located in North Morocco, using a high-resolution RCM (ALADIN-Climate) from the Med-CORDEX initiative at two different spatial resolutions (50 km and 12 km) and for two different Radiative Concentration Pathway scenarios (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5). The main issues addressed in the present study are: (i) what is the impact of increased RCM resolution on present-climate hydrological simulations and on future projections? (ii) Are the bias-correction of the RCM model and the parameters of the hydrological model stationary and transferable to different climatic conditions? (iii) What is the climate and hydrological change signal based on the new Radiative Concentration Pathways scenarios (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5)? Results indicate that high resolution simulations at 12 km better reproduce the seasonal patterns, the seasonal distributions and the extreme events of precipitation. The parameters of the hydrological model, calibrated to reproduce runoff at the monthly time step over the 1984–2010 period, do not show a strong variability between dry and wet calibration periods in a differential split-sample test. However the bias correction of precipitation by quantile-matching does not give satisfactory results in validation using the same differential split-sample testing method. Therefore a quantile-perturbation method that does not rely on any stationarity assumption and produces ensembles of perturbed series of precipitation was introduced. The climate change signal under scenarios 4.5 and 8.5 indicates a decrease of respectively −30% to −57% in surface runoff for the mid-term (2041–2062), when for the same period the projections for precipitation are ranging between −15% and −19% and for temperature between +1.28°C and +1.87°C.

scholarly journals Bias correction of temperature and precipitation over China for RCM simulations using the QM and QDM methods

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yao Tong ◽  
Xuejie Gao ◽  
Zhenyu Han ◽  
Yaqi Xu ◽  
Ying Xu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bias Correction ◽  
General Circulation ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Regional Climate ◽  
General Circulation Models ◽  
Grid Spacing ◽  
Quantile Mapping ◽  
Temperature And Precipitation ◽  
June July August ◽  
June July

Abstract Two different bias correction methods, the quantile mapping (QM) and quantile delta mapping (QDM), are applied to simulated daily temperature and precipitation over China from a set of 21st century regional climate model (the ICTP RegCM4) projections. The RegCM4 is driven by five different general circulation models (GCMs) under the representative concentration pathway RCP4.5 at a grid spacing of 25 km using the CORDEX East Asia domain. The focus is on mean temperature and precipitation in December–January–February (DJF) and June–July–August (JJA). The impacts of the two methods on the present day biases and future change signals are investigated. Results show that both the QM and QDM methods are effective in removing the systematic model biases during the validation period. For the future changes, the QDM preserves the temperature change signals well, in both magnitude and spatial distribution, while the QM artificially modifies the change signal by decreasing the warming and modifying the patterns of change. For precipitation, both methods preserve the change signals well but they produce greater magnitude of the projected increase, especially the QDM. We also show that the effects of bias correction are variable- and season-dependent. Our results show that different bias correction methods can affect in different way the simulated change signals, and therefore care has to be taken in carrying out the bias correction process.

scholarly journals Timing of human-induced climate change emergence from internal climate variability for hydrological impact studies

2018 ◽  
Vol 49 (2) ◽  
pp. 421-437 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mei-Jia Zhuan ◽  
Jie Chen ◽  
Ming-Xi Shen ◽  
Chong-Yu Xu ◽  
Hua Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Variability ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Climate Trends ◽  
Impact Studies ◽  
Internal Climate Variability ◽  
Temperature And Precipitation ◽  
Hydrological Impact ◽  
Near Term

Abstract This study proposes a method to estimate the timing of human-induced climate change (HICC) emergence from internal climate variability (ICV) for hydrological impact studies based on climate model ensembles. Specifically, ICV is defined as the inter-member difference in a multi-member ensemble of a climate model in which human-induced climate trends have been removed through a detrending method. HICC is defined as the mean of multiple climate models. The intersection between HICC and ICV curves is defined as the time of emergence (ToE) of HICC from ICV. A case study of the Hanjiang River watershed in China shows that the temperature change has already emerged from ICV during the last century. However, the precipitation change will be masked by ICV up to the middle of this century. With the joint contributions of temperature and precipitation, the ToE of streamflow occurs about one decade later than that of precipitation. This implies that consideration for water resource vulnerability to climate should be more concerned with adaptation to ICV in the near-term climate (present through mid-century), and with HICC in the long-term future, thus allowing for more robust adaptation strategies to water transfer projects in China.

scholarly journals Technical Note: The impact of spatial scale in bias correction of climate model output for hydrologic impact studies

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 685-696 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. P. Maurer ◽  
D. L. Ficklin ◽  
W. Wang
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Scale ◽  
Statistical Downscaling ◽  
Bias Correction ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Model Output ◽  
Quantile Mapping ◽  
Impact Studies ◽  
Mapping Bias ◽  
Climate Model Output

Abstract. Statistical downscaling is a commonly used technique for translating large-scale climate model output to a scale appropriate for assessing impacts. To ensure downscaled meteorology can be used in climate impact studies, downscaling must correct biases in the large-scale signal. A simple and generally effective method for accommodating systematic biases in large-scale model output is quantile mapping, which has been applied to many variables and shown to reduce biases on average, even in the presence of non-stationarity. Quantile-mapping bias correction has been applied at spatial scales ranging from hundreds of kilometers to individual points, such as weather station locations. Since water resources and other models used to simulate climate impacts are sensitive to biases in input meteorology, there is a motivation to apply bias correction at a scale fine enough that the downscaled data closely resemble historically observed data, though past work has identified undesirable consequences to applying quantile mapping at too fine a scale. This study explores the role of the spatial scale at which the quantile-mapping bias correction is applied, in the context of estimating high and low daily streamflows across the western United States. We vary the spatial scale at which quantile-mapping bias correction is performed from 2° ( ∼  200 km) to 1∕8° ( ∼  12 km) within a statistical downscaling procedure, and use the downscaled daily precipitation and temperature to drive a hydrology model. We find that little additional benefit is obtained, and some skill is degraded, when using quantile mapping at scales finer than approximately 0.5° ( ∼  50 km). This can provide guidance to those applying the quantile-mapping bias correction method for hydrologic impacts analysis.

scholarly journals High-resolution Med-CORDEX regional climate model simulations for hydrological impact studies: a first evaluation of the ALADIN-Climate model in Morocco

2013 ◽  
Vol 17 (10) ◽  
pp. 3721-3739 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y. Tramblay ◽  
D. Ruelland ◽  
S. Somot ◽  
R. Bouaicha ◽  
E. Servat
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
High Resolution ◽  
Regional Climate Model ◽  
Bias Correction ◽  
Hydrological Model ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Regional Climate ◽  
Impact Studies ◽  
Hydrological Impact ◽  
Split Sample

Abstract. In the framework of the international CORDEX program, new regional climate model (RCM) simulations at high spatial resolutions are becoming available for the Mediterranean region (Med-CORDEX initiative). This study provides the first evaluation for hydrological impact studies of one of these high-resolution simulations in a 1800 km2 catchment located in North Morocco. Different approaches are compared to analyze the climate change impacts on the hydrology of this catchment using a high-resolution RCM (ALADIN-Climate) from the Med-CORDEX initiative at two different spatial resolutions (50 and 12 km) and for two different Radiative Concentration Pathway scenarios (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5). The main issues addressed in the present study are: (i) what is the impact of increased RCM resolution on present-climate hydrological simulations and on future projections? (ii) Are the bias-correction of the RCM model and the parameters of the hydrological model stationary and transferable to different climatic conditions? (iii) What is the climate and hydrological change signal based on the new Radiative Concentration Pathways scenarios (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5)? Results indicate that high resolution simulations at 12 km better reproduce the seasonal patterns, the seasonal distributions and the extreme events of precipitation. The parameters of the hydrological model, calibrated to reproduce runoff at the monthly time step over the 1984–2010 period, do not show a strong variability between dry and wet calibration periods in a differential split-sample test. However the bias correction of precipitation by quantile-matching does not give satisfactory results in validation using the same differential split-sample testing method. Therefore a quantile-perturbation method that does not rely on any stationarity assumption and produces ensembles of perturbed series of precipitation was introduced. The climate change signal under scenarios 4.5 and 8.5 indicates a decrease of respectively −30 to −57% in surface runoff for the mid-term (2041–2062), when for the same period the projections for precipitation are ranging between −15 and −19% and for temperature between +1.3 and +1.9 °C.

scholarly journals Scaled distribution mapping: a bias correction method that preserves raw climate model projected changes

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew B. Switanek ◽  
Peter A. Troch ◽  
Christopher L. Castro ◽  
Armin Leuprecht ◽  
Hsin-I. Chang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Error Correction ◽  
Bias Correction ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Correction Method ◽  
Climate Change Signal ◽  
Quantile Mapping ◽  
Temperature And Precipitation ◽  
Distribution Mapping ◽  
Projected Changes ◽  
Time Invariant

Abstract. Commonly used bias correction methods such as quantile mapping (QM) assume the function of error correction values between modelled and observed distributions are stationary or time-invariant. This article finds that this function of the error correction values cannot be assumed to be stationary. As a result, QM lacks justification to inflate/deflate various moments of the climate change signal. Previous adaptations of QM, most notably quantile delta mapping (QDM), have been developed that do not rely on this assumption of stationarity. Here, we outline a methodology called scaled distribution mapping (SDM), which is conceptually similar to QDM, but more explicitly accounts for the frequency of rain days and the likelihood of individual events. The SDM method is found to outperform QM, QDM and detrended QM in its ability to better preserve raw climate model projected changes to meteorological variables such as temperature and precipitation.

scholarly journals Evaluation and selection of CORDEX-SA datasets and bias correction methods for a hydrological impact study in a humid tropical river basin, Kerala

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. S. Saranya ◽  
V. Nair Vinish
Keyword(s):  
River Basin ◽  
Bias Correction ◽  
General Circulation ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Circulation Model ◽  
Climate Variables ◽  
Tropical River ◽  
Hydrological Impact ◽  
Selection Of

Abstract It is well recognised that the performance of climate model simulations and bias correction methods is region specific, and, therefore, careful validation should always be performed. This study evaluates the performance of five general circulation model–regional climate model (GCM–RCM) combinations selected from CORDEX–SA datasets over a humid tropical river basin in Kerala, India, for climate variables such as precipitation, maximum and minimum temperatures. This involves ranking of the selected climate models based on an EDAS (Evaluation Based on Distance from Average Solution) method and the selection of an appropriate bias correction method for the selected three climate variables. A range of indices are used to evaluate the performance of the bias-corrected climate models to simulate observed climate data. Finally, the hydrological impact of the bias-corrected ranked models is assessed by simulating streamflow over the river basin using individual models and different combinations of models based on rank. According to the findings, hydrological simulation using an average of all GCM–RCM pairs provides the best model output in simulating streamflow, with an NSE value of 0.72. The results confirm the importance of a multimodel ensemble for improving the reliability and minimising the uncertainty of climate predictions for impact studies.

scholarly journals Technical Note: The impact of spatial scale in bias correction of climate model output for hydrologic impact studies

2015 ◽  
Vol 12 (10) ◽  
pp. 10893-10920 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. P. Maurer ◽  
D. L. Ficklin ◽  
W. Wang
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Scale ◽  
Statistical Downscaling ◽  
Bias Correction ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Model Output ◽  
Quantile Mapping ◽  
Impact Studies ◽  
Mapping Bias ◽  
Climate Model Output

Abstract. Statistical downscaling is a commonly used technique for translating large-scale climate model output to a scale appropriate for assessing impacts. To ensure downscaled meteorology can be used in climate impact studies, downscaling must correct biases in the large-scale signal. A simple and generally effective method for accommodating systematic biases in large-scale model output is quantile mapping, which has been applied to many variables and shown to reduce biases on average, even in the presence of non-stationarity. Quantile mapping bias correction has been applied at spatial scales ranging from areas of hundreds of kilometers to individual points, such as weather station locations. Since water resources and other models used to simulate climate impacts are sensitive to biases in input meteorology, there is a motivation to apply bias correction at a scale fine enough that the downscaled data closely resembles historically observed data, though past work has identified undesirable consequences to applying quantile mapping at too fine a scale. This study explores the role of the spatial scale at which the quantile-mapping bias correction is applied, in the context of estimating high and low daily streamflows across the Western United States. We vary the spatial scale at which quantile mapping bias correction is performed from 2° (∼ 200 km) to 1/8° (∼ 12 km) within a statistical downscaling procedure, and use the downscaled daily precipitation and temperature to drive a hydrology model. We find that little additional benefit is obtained, and some skill is degraded, when using quantile mapping at scales finer than approximately 0.5° (∼ 50 km). This can provide guidance to those applying the quantile mapping bias correction method for hydrologic impacts analysis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document