Assessing the impact of bias correction approaches on climate extremes and the climate change signal

被引:4
|
作者
Zhang, Hong [1 ]
Chapman, Sarah [1 ]
Trancoso, Ralph [1 ,2 ]
Toombs, Nathan [1 ]
Syktus, Jozef [2 ]
机构
[1] Queensland Govt, Dept Energy & Climate, Climate Project & Serv, GPO Box 2454, Brisbane, QLD 4001, Australia
[2] Univ Queensland, Sch Biol Sci, Brisbane, Qld, Australia
关键词
bias correction; climate change; downscaled simulations; linear scaling; quantile mapping; regional climate; transfer functions; SYSTEMATIC BIASES; MODEL SIMULATIONS; PRECIPITATION; TEMPERATURE; PROJECTIONS; ENSEMBLE; PERFORMANCE; ERROR;
D O I
10.1002/met.2204
中图分类号
P4 [大气科学(气象学)];
学科分类号
0706 ; 070601 ;
摘要
We assess the impact of three bias correction approaches on present day means and extremes, and climate change signal, for six climate variables (precipitation, minimum and maximum temperature, radiation, vapour pressure and mean sea level pressure) from dynamically downscaled climate simulations over Queensland, Australia. Results show that all bias-correction methods are effective at removing systematic model biases, however the results are variable and season-dependent. Importantly, our results are based on fully independent cross-validation, an advantage over similar studies. Linear scaling preserves the climate change signals for temperature, while quantile mapping and the distribution-based transfer function modify the climate change signal and patterns of change. The Perkins score for all the values above the 95th percentile and below the 5th percentile was used to evaluate how well the climate model matches the observational data. Bias correction improved Perkins score for extremes for some variables and seasons. We rank the bias-correction methods based on the Kling-Gupta efficiency (KGE) score calculated during the validation period. We find that linear scaling and empirical quantile mapping are the best approaches for Queensland for mean climatology. On average, bias correction led to an improvement in the KGE score of 23% annually. However, in terms of extreme values, quantile mapping and statistical distribution-based transfer function approaches perform best, and linear scaling tends to perform worst. Our results show that, except linear scaling, all approaches impact the climate change signal. This paper evaluated how different bias-correction methods impact on climate extremes and the climate change signal. We rank the bias-correction methods and provide recommendations for selecting the best approaches. Our results show that most approaches impact the climate change signal, and therefore, care needs to be taken when correcting bias of downscaled simulations. image
引用
收藏
页数:18
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] A novel bias correction methodology for climate impact simulations
    Sippel, S.
    Otto, F. E. L.
    Forkel, M.
    Allen, M. R.
    Guillod, B. P.
    Heimann, M.
    Reichstein, M.
    Seneviratne, S. I.
    Thonicke, K.
    Mahecha, M. D.
    EARTH SYSTEM DYNAMICS, 2016, 7 (01) : 71 - 88
  • [42] Revisiting the bias correction of climate models for impact studies
    Dinh, Thi Lan Anh
    Aires, Filipe
    CLIMATIC CHANGE, 2023, 176 (10)
  • [43] Revisiting the bias correction of climate models for impact studies
    Thi Lan Anh Dinh
    Filipe Aires
    Climatic Change, 2023, 176
  • [44] Climate change and the ecology of the Weser estuary region: assessing the impact of an abrupt change in climate
    Osterkamp, S
    Kraft, D
    Schirmer, M
    CLIMATE RESEARCH, 2001, 18 (1-2) : 97 - 104
  • [45] The Impact of Climate on Hydrological Extremes
    Manfreda, Salvatore
    Iacobellis, Vito
    Gioia, Andrea
    Fiorentino, Mauro
    Kochanek, Krzysztof
    WATER, 2018, 10 (06)
  • [46] Assessing Climate Change Impact on Sovereign Bonds
    Bowman, Lera
    Hu, Dapeng
    Hu, Mark
    Madaan, Amit
    da Silva, Antonio Baldaque
    JOURNAL OF PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT, 2022, 48 (10): : 98 - 118
  • [47] Assessing the observed impact of anthropogenic climate change
    Hansen, Gerrit
    Stone, Daithi
    NATURE CLIMATE CHANGE, 2016, 6 (05) : 532 - +
  • [48] Assessing the observed impact of anthropogenic climate change
    Hansen G.
    Stone D.
    Nature Climate Change, 2016, 6 (5) : 532 - 537
  • [49] Impact of bias correction and downscaling through quantile mapping on simulated climate change signal: a case study over Central Italy
    Lorenzo Sangelantoni
    Aniello Russo
    Fabio Gennaretti
    Theoretical and Applied Climatology, 2019, 135 : 725 - 740
  • [50] Impact of bias correction and downscaling through quantile mapping on simulated climate change signal: a case study over Central Italy
    Sangelantoni, Lorenzo
    Russo, Aniello
    Gennaretti, Fabio
    THEORETICAL AND APPLIED CLIMATOLOGY, 2019, 135 (1-2) : 725 - 740