{"title":"CMIP6模式模拟非洲南部马拉维热带极端气候的技能评估","authors":"Bernard Mmame, Cosmo Ngongondo","doi":"10.1007/s40808-023-01867-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Malawi, a developing country in southeast Africa, is one of the most vulnerable countries to climate change and associated impacts. Availability of observed data to inform our knowledge on climate change is however, a key challenge and has led to relatively little research in the subject. Alternative climate data products, such as the Global Climate Models (GCMs) phase6 of Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6), accords the chance to bridge this knowledge gap. These products however, need some validation against observed data to ascertain their level of performance. This study therefore, evaluates the ability of nineteen CMIP6 models in simulating both annual and seasonal temperature and precipitation over Malawi from 1980 to 2014. Observed Model performance metrics such as bias, root mean square error (RMSE), spatial correlation coefficient, standard deviation and Percentage Bias (PBIAS) were employed to assess the ability of the individual models. Our quantitative analysis shows that most of the models could simulate both temperature and precipitation over the study area, with correlation coefficient values of over 0.70, RMSE values between 0.9 and 2.0 and PBIAS of $$\\le$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml=\"http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML\"> <mml:mo>≤</mml:mo> </mml:math> 10%. The results are suggesting better performance of CMIP6 than those reported in previous studies over the study domain using CMIP3 and CMIP5 model datasets. Of all the nineteen models evaluated in this study, no single model performed best compared to observed dataset, because the models are varying in performance from season to season. Hence, climate end users are advised to use simulations of temperature and precipitation over the study area from CMIP6 models with care for decision making on the mitigation and adaptation of climate change.","PeriodicalId":51444,"journal":{"name":"Modeling Earth Systems and Environment","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of CMIP6 model skills in simulating tropical climate extremes over Malawi, Southern Africa\",\"authors\":\"Bernard Mmame, Cosmo Ngongondo\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40808-023-01867-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Malawi, a developing country in southeast Africa, is one of the most vulnerable countries to climate change and associated impacts. Availability of observed data to inform our knowledge on climate change is however, a key challenge and has led to relatively little research in the subject. Alternative climate data products, such as the Global Climate Models (GCMs) phase6 of Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6), accords the chance to bridge this knowledge gap. These products however, need some validation against observed data to ascertain their level of performance. This study therefore, evaluates the ability of nineteen CMIP6 models in simulating both annual and seasonal temperature and precipitation over Malawi from 1980 to 2014. Observed Model performance metrics such as bias, root mean square error (RMSE), spatial correlation coefficient, standard deviation and Percentage Bias (PBIAS) were employed to assess the ability of the individual models. Our quantitative analysis shows that most of the models could simulate both temperature and precipitation over the study area, with correlation coefficient values of over 0.70, RMSE values between 0.9 and 2.0 and PBIAS of $$\\\\le$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml=\\\"http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML\\\"> <mml:mo>≤</mml:mo> </mml:math> 10%. The results are suggesting better performance of CMIP6 than those reported in previous studies over the study domain using CMIP3 and CMIP5 model datasets. Of all the nineteen models evaluated in this study, no single model performed best compared to observed dataset, because the models are varying in performance from season to season. Hence, climate end users are advised to use simulations of temperature and precipitation over the study area from CMIP6 models with care for decision making on the mitigation and adaptation of climate change.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51444,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Modeling Earth Systems and Environment\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Modeling Earth Systems and Environment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40808-023-01867-3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Modeling Earth Systems and Environment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40808-023-01867-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
马拉维是非洲东南部的一个发展中国家,是最容易受到气候变化及其相关影响的国家之一。然而,能否获得观测数据来充实我们对气候变化的认识是一项关键挑战,并导致这方面的研究相对较少。替代气候数据产品,如耦合模式比较项目(CMIP6)的全球气候模式(GCMs)阶段,提供了弥补这一知识差距的机会。但是,这些产品需要根据观察到的数据进行验证,以确定其性能水平。因此,本研究评估了19个CMIP6模式模拟马拉维1980 - 2014年年和季节温度和降水的能力。采用偏差、均方根误差(RMSE)、空间相关系数、标准差和百分比偏差(PBIAS)等观察到的模型性能指标来评估单个模型的能力。定量分析表明,大部分模式均能模拟研究区温度和降水,相关系数均在0.70以上,RMSE值在0.9 ~ 2.0之间,PBIAS值$$\le$$≤10%. The results are suggesting better performance of CMIP6 than those reported in previous studies over the study domain using CMIP3 and CMIP5 model datasets. Of all the nineteen models evaluated in this study, no single model performed best compared to observed dataset, because the models are varying in performance from season to season. Hence, climate end users are advised to use simulations of temperature and precipitation over the study area from CMIP6 models with care for decision making on the mitigation and adaptation of climate change.
Evaluation of CMIP6 model skills in simulating tropical climate extremes over Malawi, Southern Africa
Abstract Malawi, a developing country in southeast Africa, is one of the most vulnerable countries to climate change and associated impacts. Availability of observed data to inform our knowledge on climate change is however, a key challenge and has led to relatively little research in the subject. Alternative climate data products, such as the Global Climate Models (GCMs) phase6 of Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6), accords the chance to bridge this knowledge gap. These products however, need some validation against observed data to ascertain their level of performance. This study therefore, evaluates the ability of nineteen CMIP6 models in simulating both annual and seasonal temperature and precipitation over Malawi from 1980 to 2014. Observed Model performance metrics such as bias, root mean square error (RMSE), spatial correlation coefficient, standard deviation and Percentage Bias (PBIAS) were employed to assess the ability of the individual models. Our quantitative analysis shows that most of the models could simulate both temperature and precipitation over the study area, with correlation coefficient values of over 0.70, RMSE values between 0.9 and 2.0 and PBIAS of $$\le$$ ≤ 10%. The results are suggesting better performance of CMIP6 than those reported in previous studies over the study domain using CMIP3 and CMIP5 model datasets. Of all the nineteen models evaluated in this study, no single model performed best compared to observed dataset, because the models are varying in performance from season to season. Hence, climate end users are advised to use simulations of temperature and precipitation over the study area from CMIP6 models with care for decision making on the mitigation and adaptation of climate change.
期刊介绍:
The peer-reviewed journal Modeling Earth Systems and Environment (MESE) provides a unique publication platform by discussing interdisciplinary problems and approaches through modeling. The focus of MESE is on modeling in earth and environment related fields, such as: earth and environmental engineering; climate change; hydrogeology; aquatic systems and functions; atmospheric research and water; land use and vegetation change; modeling of forest and agricultural dynamics; and economic and energy systems. Furthermore, the journal combines these topics with modeling of anthropogenic or social phenomena and projections to be used by decision makers.In addition to Research Articles, Modeling Earth Systems and Environment publishes Review Articles, Letters, and Data Articles:Research Articles have a recommended length of 10-12 published pages, referees will be asked to comment specifically on the manuscript length for manuscripts exceeding this limit.Review articles provide readers with assessments of advances, as well as projected developments in key areas of modeling earth systems and the environment. We expect that a typical review article will occupy twelve to fifteen pages in journal format, and have a substantial number of citations, which justify the comprehensive nature of the review.Letters have a shorter publication time and provide an opportunity to rapidly disseminate novel results expected to have an immediate impact in the earth system and environmental modeling community. Letters should include a short abstract, should not exceed four journal pages and about 10 citations.Data Articles give you the opportunity to share and reuse each other''s datasets as electronic supplementary material. To facilitate reproducibility, you need to thoroughly describe your data, the methods of collection, and the already proceeded assimilation. Data Articles have a recommended length of 4-6 pages.Information on Open Research Funding and Support may be found here: https://www.springernature.com/gp/open-research/institutional-agreements