ALBERT

All Library Books, journals and Electronic Records Telegrafenberg

feed icon rss

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
Filter
  • 2015-2019  (5)
  • 2018  (5)
Collection
Language
Years
  • 2015-2019  (5)
Year
  • 1
    Monograph available for loan
    Monograph available for loan
    Cambridge, United Kingdom : Cambridge University Press
    Call number: PIK N 456-18-91566
    Type of Medium: Monograph available for loan
    Pages: xvi, 347 Seiten , Diagramme , 25 cm
    ISBN: 9781107066052
    Language: English
    Note: Contents: 1. Introduction ; Part I. Background and Fundamentals: 2. Regional climate ; 3. History of downscaling ; 4. Rationale of downscaling ; 5. User needs ; 6. Mathematical and statistical methods ; 7. Reference observations ; 8. Climate modelling ; 9. Uncertainties ; Part II. Statistical Downscaling Concepts and Methods: 10. Structure of statistical downscaling methods ; 11. Perfect prognosis ; 12. Model output statistics ; 13. Weather generators ; 14. Other approaches ; Part III. Downscaling in Practice and Outlook: 15. Evaluation ; 16. Performance of statistical downscaling ; 17. A regional modelling debate ; 18. Use of downscaling in practice ; 19. Outlook ; Appendix A ; Appendix B
    Location: A 18 - must be ordered
    Branch Library: PIK Library
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    Publication Date: 2018-08-01
    Description: Compound events are extreme impacts that depend on multiple variables that need not be extreme themselves. In this study, we analyze soil moisture drought as a compound event of precipitation and potential evapotranspiration (PET) on multiple time scales related to both meteorological drought and heat waves in wet, transitional, and dry climates in Europe during summer. Drought indices that incorporate PET to account for the effect of temperature on drought conditions are sensitive to global warming. However, as evapotranspiration (ET) is moisture limited in dry climates, the use of such drought indices has often been criticized. We therefore assess the relevance of the contributions of both precipitation and PET to the estimation of soil moisture drought. Applying a statistical model based on pair copula constructions to data from FluxNet sites in Europe, we find at all sites that precipitation exerts the main control over soil moisture drought. At wet sites PET is additionally required to explain the onset, severity, and persistence of drought events over different time scales. At dry sites, where ET is moisture limited in summer, PET does not improve the estimation of soil moisture. In dry climates, increases in drought severity measured by indices incorporating PET may therefore not indicate further drying of soil but the increased availability of energy that can contribute to other environmental hazards such as heat waves and wildfires. We therefore highlight that drought indices including PET should be interpreted within the context of the climate and season in which they are applied in order to maximize their value.
    Print ISSN: 1525-755X
    Electronic ISSN: 1525-7541
    Topics: Geography , Geosciences , Physics
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    Publication Date: 2018-09-18
    Description: We demonstrate both analytically and with a modelling example that cross-validation of free-running bias-corrected climate change simulations against observations is misleading. The underlying reasoning is as follows: a cross-validation can have in principle two outcomes. A negative (in the sense of not rejecting a null hypothesis), if the residual bias in the validation period after bias correction vanishes; and a positive, if the residual bias in the validation period after bias correction is large. It can be shown analytically that the residual bias depends solely on the difference between the simulated and observed change between calibration and validation periods. This change, however, depends mainly on the realizations of internal variability in the observations and climate model. As a consequence, the outcome of a cross-validation is also dominated by internal variability, and does not allow for any conclusion about the sensibility of a bias correction. In particular, a sensible bias correction may be rejected (false positive) and a non-sensible bias correction may be accepted (false negative). We therefore propose to avoid cross-validation when evaluating bias correction of free-running bias-corrected climate change simulations against observations. Instead, one should evaluate non-calibrated temporal, spatial and process-based aspects.
    Print ISSN: 1027-5606
    Electronic ISSN: 1607-7938
    Topics: Geography , Geosciences
    Published by Copernicus on behalf of European Geosciences Union.
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 4
    Publication Date: 2018-04-17
    Description: We demonstrate both analytically and with a modelling example that cross-validation of free running bias-corrected climate change simulations against observations is misleading. The underlying reasoning is as follows: a cross-validation can have in principle two outcomes. A negative (in the sense of not rejecting a Null hypothesis), if the residual bias in the validation period after bias correction vanishes; and a positive, if the residual bias in the validation period after bias correction is large. It can be shown analytically that the residual bias depends solely on the difference between the simulated and observed change between calibration and validation period. These changes, however, depend mainly on the realisations of internal variability in the observations and climate model. As a consequence, also the outcome of a cross-validation is dominated by internal variability, and does not allow for any conclusion about the sensibility of a bias correction. In particular, a sensible bias correction may be rejected (false positive) and a non-sensible bias correction may be accepted (false negative). We therefore propose to avoid cross-validation when evaluating bias correction of free running bias-corrected climate change simulations against observations. Instead, one should evaluate temporal, spatial and process-based aspects.
    Print ISSN: 1812-2108
    Electronic ISSN: 1812-2116
    Topics: Geography , Geosciences
    Published by Copernicus on behalf of European Geosciences Union.
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 5
    Publication Date: 2018-10-23
    Print ISSN: 0899-8418
    Electronic ISSN: 1097-0088
    Topics: Geosciences , Physics
    Published by Wiley
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...