Bias correction of surface downwelling longwave and shortwave radiation for the EWEMBI dataset

dc.bibliographicCitation.firstPage627eng
dc.bibliographicCitation.issue2eng
dc.bibliographicCitation.journalTitleEarth System Dynamicseng
dc.bibliographicCitation.lastPage645eng
dc.bibliographicCitation.volume9
dc.contributor.authorLange, Stefan
dc.date.accessioned2018-09-14T13:52:19Z
dc.date.available2019-06-28T10:34:39Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.description.abstractMany meteorological forcing datasets include bias-corrected surface downwelling longwave and shortwave radiation (rlds and rsds). Methods used for such bias corrections range from multi-year monthly mean value scaling to quantile mapping at the daily timescale. An additional downscaling is necessary if the data to be corrected have a higher spatial resolution than the observational data used to determine the biases. This was the case when EartH2Observe (E2OBS; Calton et al., 2016) rlds and rsds were bias-corrected using more coarsely resolved Surface Radiation Budget (SRB; Stackhouse Jr. et al., 2011) data for the production of the meteorological forcing dataset EWEMBI (Lange, 2016). This article systematically compares various parametric quantile mapping methods designed specifically for this purpose, including those used for the production of EWEMBI rlds and rsds. The methods vary in the timescale at which they operate, in their way of accounting for physical upper radiation limits, and in their approach to bridging the spatial resolution gap between E2OBS and SRB. It is shown how temporal and spatial variability deflation related to bilinear interpolation and other deterministic downscaling approaches can be overcome by downscaling the target statistics of quantile mapping from the SRB to the E2OBS grid such that the sub-SRB-grid-scale spatial variability present in the original E2OBS data is retained. Cross validations at the daily and monthly timescales reveal that it is worthwhile to take empirical estimates of physical upper limits into account when adjusting either radiation component and that, overall, bias correction at the daily timescale is more effective than bias correction at the monthly timescale if sampling errors are taken into account.eng
dc.description.versionpublishedVersioneng
dc.formatapplication/pdf
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.34657/194
dc.identifier.urihttps://oa.tib.eu/renate/handle/123456789/3753
dc.language.isoengeng
dc.publisherMünchen : European Geopyhsical Unioneng
dc.relation.doihttps://doi.org/10.5194/esd-9-627-2018
dc.rights.licenseCC BY 4.0 Unportedeng
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/eng
dc.subject.ddc500eng
dc.subject.otherBudget controleng
dc.subject.otherImage resolutioneng
dc.subject.otherBilinear interpolationeng
dc.subject.otherEmpirical estimateeng
dc.subject.otherMeteorological forcingeng
dc.subject.otherObservational dataeng
dc.subject.otherShort-wave radiationeng
dc.subject.otherSpatial variabilityeng
dc.subject.otherSurface radiation budgeteng
dc.subject.otherTemporal and spatial variabilityeng
dc.titleBias correction of surface downwelling longwave and shortwave radiation for the EWEMBI dataseteng
dc.typeArticleeng
dc.typeTexteng
tib.accessRightsopenAccesseng
wgl.contributorPIKeng
wgl.subjectUmweltwissenschafteneng
wgl.typeZeitschriftenartikeleng
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
esd-9-627-2018.pdf
Size:
4.45 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description: