3 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
- ItemDetecting impacts of extreme events with ecological in situ monitoring networks(München : European Geopyhsical Union, 2017) Mahecha, Miguel D.; Gans, Fabian; Sippel, Sebastian; Donges, Jonathan F.; Kaminski, Thomas; Metzger, Stefan; Migliavacca, Mirco; Papale, Dario; Rammig, Anja; Zscheischler, Jakob; Arneth, AlmutExtreme hydrometeorological conditions typically impact ecophysiological processes on land. Satellite-based observations of the terrestrial biosphere provide an important reference for detecting and describing the spatiotemporal development of such events. However, in-depth investigations of ecological processes during extreme events require additional in situ observations. The question is whether the density of existing ecological in situ networks is sufficient for analysing the impact of extreme events, and what are expected event detection rates of ecological in situ networks of a given size. To assess these issues, we build a baseline of extreme reductions in the fraction of absorbed photosynthetically active radiation (FAPAR), identified by a new event detection method tailored to identify extremes of regional relevance. We then investigate the event detection success rates of hypothetical networks of varying sizes. Our results show that large extremes can be reliably detected with relatively small networks, but also reveal a linear decay of detection probabilities towards smaller extreme events in log–log space. For instance, networks with ≈ 100 randomly placed sites in Europe yield a ≥ 90 % chance of detecting the eight largest (typically very large) extreme events; but only a ≥ 50 % chance of capturing the 39 largest events. These findings are consistent with probability-theoretic considerations, but the slopes of the decay rates deviate due to temporal autocorrelation and the exact implementation of the extreme event detection algorithm. Using the examples of AmeriFlux and NEON, we then investigate to what degree ecological in situ networks can capture extreme events of a given size. Consistent with our theoretical considerations, we find that today's systematically designed networks (i.e. NEON) reliably detect the largest extremes, but that the extreme event detection rates are not higher than would be achieved by randomly designed networks. Spatio-temporal expansions of ecological in situ monitoring networks should carefully consider the size distribution characteristics of extreme events if the aim is also to monitor the impacts of such events in the terrestrial biosphere.
- ItemThe effect of univariate bias adjustment on multivariate hazard estimates(Göttingen : Copernicus Publ., 2019) Zscheischler, Jakob; Fischer, Erich M.; Lange, StefanBias adjustment is often a necessity in estimating climate impacts because impact models usually rely on unbiased climate information, a requirement that climate model outputs rarely fulfil. Most currently used statistical bias-adjustment methods adjust each climate variable separately, even though impacts usually depend on multiple potentially dependent variables. Human heat stress, for instance, depends on temperature and relative humidity, two variables that are often strongly correlated. Whether univariate bias-adjustment methods effectively improve estimates of impacts that depend on multiple drivers is largely unknown, and the lack of long-term impact data prevents a direct comparison between model outputs and observations for many climate-related impacts. Here we use two hazard indicators, heat stress and a simple fire risk indicator, as proxies for more sophisticated impact models. We show that univariate bias-adjustment methods such as univariate quantile mapping often cannot effectively reduce biases in multivariate hazard estimates. In some cases, it even increases biases. These cases typically occur (i) when hazards depend equally strongly on more than one climatic driver, (ii) when models exhibit biases in the dependence structure of drivers and (iii) when univariate biases are relatively small. Using a perfect model approach, we further quantify the uncertainty in bias-adjusted hazard indicators due to internal variability and show how imperfect bias adjustment can amplify this uncertainty. Both issues can be addressed successfully with a statistical bias adjustment that corrects the multivariate dependence structure in addition to the marginal distributions of the climate drivers. Our results suggest that currently many modeled climate impacts are associated with uncertainties related to the choice of bias adjustment. We conclude that in cases where impacts depend on multiple dependent climate variables these uncertainties can be reduced using statistical bias-adjustment approaches that correct the variables' multivariate dependence structure. © 2019 Copernicus GmbH. All rights reserved.
- ItemInferring causation from time series in Earth system sciences([London] : Nature Publishing Group UK, 2019) Runge, Jakob; Bathiany, Sebastian; Bollt, Erik; Camps-Valls, Gustau; Coumou, Dim; Deyle, Ethan; Glymour, Clark; Kretschmer, Marlene; Mahecha, Miguel D.; Muñoz-Marí, Jordi; van Nes, Egbert H.; Peters, Jonas; Quax, Rick; Reichstein, Markus; Scheffer, Marten; Schölkopf, Bernhard; Spirtes, Peter; Sugihara, George; Sun, Jie; Zhang, Kun; Zscheischler, JakobThe heart of the scientific enterprise is a rational effort to understand the causes behind the phenomena we observe. In large-scale complex dynamical systems such as the Earth system, real experiments are rarely feasible. However, a rapidly increasing amount of observational and simulated data opens up the use of novel data-driven causal methods beyond the commonly adopted correlation techniques. Here, we give an overview of causal inference frameworks and identify promising generic application cases common in Earth system sciences and beyond. We discuss challenges and initiate the benchmark platform causeme.net to close the gap between method users and developers. © 2019, The Author(s).