English
 
User Manual Privacy Policy Disclaimer Contact us
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Journal Article

Bias Correction of RCM Precipitation by TIN-Copula Method: A Case Study for Historical and Future Simulations in Cyprus

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons101104

Lelieveld,  Jos
Atmospheric Chemistry, Max Planck Institute for Chemistry, Max Planck Society;

External Ressource
No external resources are shared
Fulltext (public)
There are no public fulltexts stored in PuRe
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Lazoglou, G., Zittis, G., Anagnostopoulou, C., Hadjinicolaou, P., & Lelieveld, J. (2020). Bias Correction of RCM Precipitation by TIN-Copula Method: A Case Study for Historical and Future Simulations in Cyprus. Climate: open access journal, 8(7): 85. doi:10.3390/cli8070085.


Cite as: http://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0007-4F4F-A
Abstract
Numerical models are being used for the simulation of recent climate conditions as well as future projections. Due to the complexity of the Earth’s climate system and processes occurring at sub-grid scales, model results often diverge from the observed values. Different methods have been developed to minimize such biases. In the present study, the recently introduced “triangular irregular networks (TIN)-Copula” method was used for the bias correction of modelled monthly total and extreme precipitation in Cyprus. The method was applied to a 15-year historical period and two future periods of the same duration. Precipitation time-series were derived from a 12-km resolution EURO-CORDEX regional climate simulation. The results show that the TIN-Copula method significantly reduces the positive biases between the model results and observations during the historical period of 1986–2000, for both total and extreme precipitation (>80%). However, the level of improvement differs temporally and spatially. For future periods, the model tends to project significantly higher total precipitation rates prior to bias correction, while for extremes the differences are smaller. The adjustments slightly affect the overall climate change signal, which tends to be enhanced after bias correction, especially for total precipitation and for the autumn period.