Search

Global climate model simulations inherently contain multiple biases that, when used as boundary conditions for regional climate models, have the potential to produce poor downscaled simulations. Removing these biases before downscaling can potentially improve regional climate change impact assessment. In particular, reducing the low-frequency variability biases in atmospheric variables as well as modeled rainfall is important for hydrological impact assessment, predominantly for the improved simulation of floods and droughts. The impact of this bias in the lateral boundary conditions driving the dynamical downscaling has not been explored before. Here the use of three approaches for correcting the lateral boundary biases including mean, variance, and modification of sample moments through the use of a nested bias correction (NBC) method that corrects for low-frequency variability bias is investigated. These corrections are implemented at the 6-hourly time scale on the global climate model simulations to drive a regional climate model over the Australian Coordinated Regional Climate Downscaling Experiment (CORDEX) domain. The results show that the most substantial improvement in low-frequency variability after bias correction is obtained from modifying the mean field, with smaller changes attributed to the variance. Explicitly modifying monthly and annual lag-1 autocorrelations through NBC does not substantially improve low-frequency variability attributes of simulated precipitation in the regional model over a simpler mean bias correction. These results raise questions about the nature of bias correction techniques that are required to successfully gain improvement in regional climate model simulations and show that more complicated techniques do not necessarily lead to more skillful simulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigates the ability of a regional climate model (RCM) to simulate the diurnal cycle of precipitation over southeast Australia, to provide a basis for understanding the mechanisms that drive diurnal variability. When compared with 195 observation gauges, the RCM tends to simulate too many occurrences and too little intensity for precipitation events at the 3-hourly time scale. However, the overall precipitation amounts are well simulated and the diurnal variability in occurrences and intensities are generally well reproduced, particularly in spring and summer. In terms of precipitation amounts, the RCM overestimated the diurnal cycle during the warmer months but was reasonably accurate during winter. The timing of the maxima and minima was found to match the observed timings well. The spatial pattern of diurnal variability in the Weather Research and Forecasting model outputs was remarkably similar to the observed record, capturing many features of regional variability. The RCM diurnal cycle was dominated by the convective (subgrid scale) precipitation. In the RCM the diurnal cycle of convective precipitation over land corresponds well to atmospheric instability and thermally triggered convection over large areas, and also to the large-scale moisture convergence at 700 hPa along the east coast, with the strongest diurnal cycles present where these three mechanisms are in phase. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Presently, there is no standardized framework or metrics identified to assess regional climate model precipitation output. Because of this, it can be difficult to make a one-to-one comparison of their performance between regions or studies, or against coarser-resolution global climate models. To address this, we introduce the first steps toward establishing a dynamic, yet standardized, benchmarking framework that can be used to assess model skill in simulating various characteristics of rainfall. Benchmarking differs from typical model evaluation in that it requires that performance expectations are set a priori. This framework has innumerable applications to underpin scientific studies that assess model performance, inform model development priorities, and aid stakeholder decision-making by providing a structured methodology to identify fit-for-purpose model simulations for climate risk assessments and adaptation strategies. While this framework can be applied to regional climate model simulations at any spatial domain, we demonstrate its effectiveness over Australia using high-resolution, 0.5° × 0.5° simulations from the CORDEX-Australasia ensemble. We provide recommendations for selecting metrics and pragmatic benchmarking thresholds depending on the application of the framework. This includes a top tier of minimum standard metrics to establish a minimum benchmarking standard for ongoing climate model assessment. We present multiple applications of the framework using feedback received from potential user communities and encourage the scientific and user community to build on this framework by tailoring benchmarks and incorporating additional metrics specific to their application. Significance Statement: We introduce a standardized benchmarking framework for assessing the skill of regional climate models in simulating precipitation. This framework addresses the lack of a uniform approach in the scientific community and has diverse applications in scientific research, model development, and societal decision-making. We define a set of minimum standard metrics to underpin ongoing climate model assessments that quantify model skill in simulating fundamental characteristics of rainfall. We provide guidance for selecting metrics and defining benchmarking thresholds, demonstrated using multiple case studies over Australia. This framework has broad applications for numerous user communities and provides a structured methodology for the assessment of model performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]