埃塞俄比亚卡塔流域降雨-径流模型的区域气候模型和偏差校正方法

Babur Tesfaye Yersaw, Mulusew Bezabih Chane
{"title":"埃塞俄比亚卡塔流域降雨-径流模型的区域气候模型和偏差校正方法","authors":"Babur Tesfaye Yersaw, Mulusew Bezabih Chane","doi":"10.1186/s40068-024-00340-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Systematic errors in regional climate models (RCMs) hinder their implementation and lead to uncertainties in regional hydrological climate change studies. As a result, checking the accuracy of climate model simulations and applying bias correction are preliminary methods for achieving consistent findings. Therefore, identifying suitable RCM models for bias correction is important for providing reliable inputs for evaluating climate change impacts. The impacts of bias correction methods on streamflow were assessed on the Katar catchment within the Lake Ziway subbasin using coordinated regional climate downscaling experiments with a spatial resolution of 50 km (CORDEX-44) RCMs through the Integrated Hydrological Modelling System (IHMS) version 6.3. This study evaluated fourteen RCM models under five precipitation and three temperature bias correction methods for the Katar catchment. Statistical approaches, such as bias (PBIAS), the root mean square error (RMSE), the mean absolute error (MAE), the coefficient of variation (CV), the coefficient of determination (R2), and the relative volume error (RVE), are used for performance analysis. GERICS-MPI, RAC4-NOAA-2G, and CCLM4-NCCR-AFR-22 have better performances for both rainfall and temprature. The empirical cumulative distribution function (ECDF) method performed best in removing bias from the frequency-based statistics of rainfall and streamflow, followed by the power transformation (PT), distribution mapping (DM), local intensity scaling (LOCI), and linear scaling (LS) methods. Specifically, for temperature, the VARI and DM methods perform better in frequency-based statistics than the LS method. The performance of hydrological modeling is strongly affected by the selection of rainfall bias correction methods. In addition, the effect of the temperature bias correction method was not significant. The adequacy of the BCM depends on the RCM models and regional context. Therefore, the BCM implementation procedure can be adapted from region to region. This study revealed that the performance of the RCM models differed and that the errors in the RCM model outputs were reduced by the use of bias correction methods.","PeriodicalId":12037,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Systems Research","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Regional climate models and bias correction methods for rainfall-runoff modeling in Katar watershed, Ethiopia\",\"authors\":\"Babur Tesfaye Yersaw, Mulusew Bezabih Chane\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40068-024-00340-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Systematic errors in regional climate models (RCMs) hinder their implementation and lead to uncertainties in regional hydrological climate change studies. As a result, checking the accuracy of climate model simulations and applying bias correction are preliminary methods for achieving consistent findings. Therefore, identifying suitable RCM models for bias correction is important for providing reliable inputs for evaluating climate change impacts. The impacts of bias correction methods on streamflow were assessed on the Katar catchment within the Lake Ziway subbasin using coordinated regional climate downscaling experiments with a spatial resolution of 50 km (CORDEX-44) RCMs through the Integrated Hydrological Modelling System (IHMS) version 6.3. This study evaluated fourteen RCM models under five precipitation and three temperature bias correction methods for the Katar catchment. Statistical approaches, such as bias (PBIAS), the root mean square error (RMSE), the mean absolute error (MAE), the coefficient of variation (CV), the coefficient of determination (R2), and the relative volume error (RVE), are used for performance analysis. GERICS-MPI, RAC4-NOAA-2G, and CCLM4-NCCR-AFR-22 have better performances for both rainfall and temprature. The empirical cumulative distribution function (ECDF) method performed best in removing bias from the frequency-based statistics of rainfall and streamflow, followed by the power transformation (PT), distribution mapping (DM), local intensity scaling (LOCI), and linear scaling (LS) methods. Specifically, for temperature, the VARI and DM methods perform better in frequency-based statistics than the LS method. The performance of hydrological modeling is strongly affected by the selection of rainfall bias correction methods. In addition, the effect of the temperature bias correction method was not significant. The adequacy of the BCM depends on the RCM models and regional context. Therefore, the BCM implementation procedure can be adapted from region to region. This study revealed that the performance of the RCM models differed and that the errors in the RCM model outputs were reduced by the use of bias correction methods.\",\"PeriodicalId\":12037,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Systems Research\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Systems Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40068-024-00340-z\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Systems Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40068-024-00340-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

区域气候模式(RCM)中的系统误差阻碍了其实施,并导致区域水文气候变化研究中的不确定性。因此,检查气候模型模拟的准确性和应用偏差修正是获得一致结论的初步方法。因此,确定合适的 RCM 模型进行偏差校正对于为评估气候变化影响提供可靠的投入非常重要。通过综合水文模拟系统(IHMS)6.3 版,使用空间分辨率为 50 千米(CORDEX-44)的区域气候降尺度协调实验 RCM,评估了偏差校正方法对齐威湖子流域卡塔集水区河水流量的影响。这项研究评估了卡塔集水区在五种降水和三种温度偏差校正方法下的 14 个 RCM 模型。采用偏差 (PBIAS)、均方根误差 (RMSE)、平均绝对误差 (MAE)、变异系数 (CV)、判定系数 (R2) 和相对体积误差 (RVE) 等统计方法进行性能分析。GERICS-MPI、RAC4-NOAA-2G 和 CCLM4-NCCR-AFR-22 在降雨量和温度方面都有较好的表现。经验累积分布函数(ECDF)方法在消除降雨量和河水流量基于频率统计的偏差方面表现最佳,其次是功率变换(PT)、分布映射(DM)、局部强度缩放(LOCI)和线性缩放(LS)方法。具体而言,对于温度,VARI 和 DM 方法在基于频率的统计中的表现优于 LS 方法。水文模型的性能受到降雨偏差校正方法选择的很大影响。此外,温度偏差校正方法的影响并不显著。BCM 的适当性取决于 RCM 模型和区域背景。因此,可以根据不同地区的情况调整业连管的实施程序。这项研究表明,区域气候变化模型的性能各不相同,使用偏差校正方法可减少区域气候变化模型输出的误差。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Regional climate models and bias correction methods for rainfall-runoff modeling in Katar watershed, Ethiopia
Systematic errors in regional climate models (RCMs) hinder their implementation and lead to uncertainties in regional hydrological climate change studies. As a result, checking the accuracy of climate model simulations and applying bias correction are preliminary methods for achieving consistent findings. Therefore, identifying suitable RCM models for bias correction is important for providing reliable inputs for evaluating climate change impacts. The impacts of bias correction methods on streamflow were assessed on the Katar catchment within the Lake Ziway subbasin using coordinated regional climate downscaling experiments with a spatial resolution of 50 km (CORDEX-44) RCMs through the Integrated Hydrological Modelling System (IHMS) version 6.3. This study evaluated fourteen RCM models under five precipitation and three temperature bias correction methods for the Katar catchment. Statistical approaches, such as bias (PBIAS), the root mean square error (RMSE), the mean absolute error (MAE), the coefficient of variation (CV), the coefficient of determination (R2), and the relative volume error (RVE), are used for performance analysis. GERICS-MPI, RAC4-NOAA-2G, and CCLM4-NCCR-AFR-22 have better performances for both rainfall and temprature. The empirical cumulative distribution function (ECDF) method performed best in removing bias from the frequency-based statistics of rainfall and streamflow, followed by the power transformation (PT), distribution mapping (DM), local intensity scaling (LOCI), and linear scaling (LS) methods. Specifically, for temperature, the VARI and DM methods perform better in frequency-based statistics than the LS method. The performance of hydrological modeling is strongly affected by the selection of rainfall bias correction methods. In addition, the effect of the temperature bias correction method was not significant. The adequacy of the BCM depends on the RCM models and regional context. Therefore, the BCM implementation procedure can be adapted from region to region. This study revealed that the performance of the RCM models differed and that the errors in the RCM model outputs were reduced by the use of bias correction methods.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信