气候影响评估中时间分层对 GCM 偏差校正的关键作用

IF 7.3 1区 地球科学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Earths Future Pub Date : 2024-08-19 DOI:10.1029/2023EF004242
Nicolás A. Vásquez, Pablo A. Mendoza, Wouter J. M. Knoben, Louise Arnal, Miguel Lagos-Zúñiga, Martyn Clark, Ximena Vargas
{"title":"气候影响评估中时间分层对 GCM 偏差校正的关键作用","authors":"Nicolás A. Vásquez,&nbsp;Pablo A. Mendoza,&nbsp;Wouter J. M. Knoben,&nbsp;Louise Arnal,&nbsp;Miguel Lagos-Zúñiga,&nbsp;Martyn Clark,&nbsp;Ximena Vargas","doi":"10.1029/2023EF004242","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Characterizing climate change impacts on water resources typically relies on Global Climate Model (GCM) outputs that are bias-corrected using observational data sets. In this process, two pivotal decisions are (a) the Bias Correction Method (BCM) and (b) how to handle the historically observed time series, which can be used as a continuous whole (i.e., without dividing it into sub-periods), or partitioned into monthly, seasonal (e.g., 3 months), or any other temporal stratification (TS). Here, we examine how the interplay between the choice of BCM, TS, and the raw GCM seasonality may affect historical portrayals and projected changes. To this end, we use outputs from 29 GCMs belonging to the CMIP6 under the Shared Socioeconomic Pathway 5–8.5 scenario, using seven BCMs and three TSs (entire period, seasonal, and monthly). The results show that the effectiveness of BCMs in removing biases can vary depending on the TS and climate indices analyzed. Further, the choice of BCM and TS may yield different projected change signals and seasonality (especially for precipitation), even for climate models with low bias and a reasonable representation of precipitation seasonality during a reference period. Because some BCMs may be computationally expensive, we recommend using the linear scaling method as a diagnostics tool to assess how the choice of TS may affect the projected precipitation seasonality of a specific GCM. More generally, the results presented here unveil trade-offs in how BCMs are applied, regardless of the climate regime, urging the hydroclimate community to carefully implement these techniques.</p>","PeriodicalId":48748,"journal":{"name":"Earths Future","volume":"12 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/2023EF004242","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Key Role of Temporal Stratification for GCM Bias Correction in Climate Impact Assessments\",\"authors\":\"Nicolás A. Vásquez,&nbsp;Pablo A. Mendoza,&nbsp;Wouter J. M. Knoben,&nbsp;Louise Arnal,&nbsp;Miguel Lagos-Zúñiga,&nbsp;Martyn Clark,&nbsp;Ximena Vargas\",\"doi\":\"10.1029/2023EF004242\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Characterizing climate change impacts on water resources typically relies on Global Climate Model (GCM) outputs that are bias-corrected using observational data sets. In this process, two pivotal decisions are (a) the Bias Correction Method (BCM) and (b) how to handle the historically observed time series, which can be used as a continuous whole (i.e., without dividing it into sub-periods), or partitioned into monthly, seasonal (e.g., 3 months), or any other temporal stratification (TS). Here, we examine how the interplay between the choice of BCM, TS, and the raw GCM seasonality may affect historical portrayals and projected changes. To this end, we use outputs from 29 GCMs belonging to the CMIP6 under the Shared Socioeconomic Pathway 5–8.5 scenario, using seven BCMs and three TSs (entire period, seasonal, and monthly). The results show that the effectiveness of BCMs in removing biases can vary depending on the TS and climate indices analyzed. Further, the choice of BCM and TS may yield different projected change signals and seasonality (especially for precipitation), even for climate models with low bias and a reasonable representation of precipitation seasonality during a reference period. Because some BCMs may be computationally expensive, we recommend using the linear scaling method as a diagnostics tool to assess how the choice of TS may affect the projected precipitation seasonality of a specific GCM. More generally, the results presented here unveil trade-offs in how BCMs are applied, regardless of the climate regime, urging the hydroclimate community to carefully implement these techniques.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48748,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Earths Future\",\"volume\":\"12 8\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/2023EF004242\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Earths Future\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2023EF004242\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Earths Future","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2023EF004242","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

确定气候变化对水资源的影响通常依赖于利用观测数据集进行偏差校正的全球气候模式(GCM)输出结果。在此过程中,有两个关键决定:(a) 偏差校正方法 (BCM);(b) 如何处理历史上观测到的时间序列,可以将其作为一个连续的整体(即不划分为子时期),或划分为月度、季节(如 3 个月)或任何其他时间分层 (TS)。在此,我们将研究 BCM、TS 和原始 GCM 季节性之间的相互作用如何影响历史描述和预测变化。为此,我们使用了属于 CMIP6 的 29 个 GCM 在共享社会经济路径 5-8.5 情景下的输出结果,并使用了 7 种 BCM 和 3 种 TS(全周期、季节和月度)。结果表明,根据所分析的 TS 和气候指数的不同,BCM 在消除偏差方面的效果也会不同。此外,即使对于偏差较小且合理反映了参考时段降水季节性的气候模式,选择 BCM 和 TS 也可能产生不同的预测变化信号和季节性(尤其是降水)。由于某些 BCM 的计算成本可能很高,我们建议使用线性缩放方法作为诊断工具,以评估 TS 的选择如何影响特定 GCM 的降水季节性预测。总体而言,本文介绍的结果揭示了在应用生物累积模型时的权衡取舍,无论气候制度如何,敦促水文气候界谨慎应用这些技术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Key Role of Temporal Stratification for GCM Bias Correction in Climate Impact Assessments

Characterizing climate change impacts on water resources typically relies on Global Climate Model (GCM) outputs that are bias-corrected using observational data sets. In this process, two pivotal decisions are (a) the Bias Correction Method (BCM) and (b) how to handle the historically observed time series, which can be used as a continuous whole (i.e., without dividing it into sub-periods), or partitioned into monthly, seasonal (e.g., 3 months), or any other temporal stratification (TS). Here, we examine how the interplay between the choice of BCM, TS, and the raw GCM seasonality may affect historical portrayals and projected changes. To this end, we use outputs from 29 GCMs belonging to the CMIP6 under the Shared Socioeconomic Pathway 5–8.5 scenario, using seven BCMs and three TSs (entire period, seasonal, and monthly). The results show that the effectiveness of BCMs in removing biases can vary depending on the TS and climate indices analyzed. Further, the choice of BCM and TS may yield different projected change signals and seasonality (especially for precipitation), even for climate models with low bias and a reasonable representation of precipitation seasonality during a reference period. Because some BCMs may be computationally expensive, we recommend using the linear scaling method as a diagnostics tool to assess how the choice of TS may affect the projected precipitation seasonality of a specific GCM. More generally, the results presented here unveil trade-offs in how BCMs are applied, regardless of the climate regime, urging the hydroclimate community to carefully implement these techniques.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Earths Future
Earths Future ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCESGEOSCIENCES, MULTIDI-GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
7.30%
发文量
260
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Earth’s Future: A transdisciplinary open access journal, Earth’s Future focuses on the state of the Earth and the prediction of the planet’s future. By publishing peer-reviewed articles as well as editorials, essays, reviews, and commentaries, this journal will be the preeminent scholarly resource on the Anthropocene. It will also help assess the risks and opportunities associated with environmental changes and challenges.
期刊最新文献
Effective Adaptation Options to Alleviate Nuisance Flooding in Coastal Megacities—Learning From Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam Observations Over a Century Underscore an Increasing Likelihood of Compound Dry-Hot Events in China Response of Global Runoff Components to Rising CO2 Increased Asian Sulfate Aerosol Emissions Remarkably Enhance Sahel Summer Precipitation Consumption-Based Emissions of African Countries: An Analysis of Decoupling Dynamics and Drivers
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1