The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Skill, Correction, and Downscaling of GCM-Simulated Precipitation
Open accessAbstract
The ability of general circulation models (GCMs) to correctly simulate precipitation is usually assessed by comparing simulated mean precipitation with observed climatologies. However, to what extent the skill in simulating average precipitation indicates how well the models represent temporal changes is unclear. A direct assessment of the latter is hampered by the fact that freely evolving climate simulations for past periods are not set up to reproduce the specific evolution of internal atmospheric variability. Therefore, model-to-real-world comparisons of time series of daily, monthly, or annual precipitation are not meaningful. Here, for the first time, the authors quantify GCM skill in simulating precipitation variability using simulations in which the temporal evolution of the large-scale atmospheric state closely matches that of the real world. This is achieved by nudging the atmospheric states in the ECHAM5 GCM, but crucially not the precipitation field itself, toward the 40-yr European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) Re-Analysis (ERA-40). Global correlation maps between observed and simulated seasonal precipitation allow areas in which simulated future precipitation changes are likely to be meaningful to be identified. In many areas, correlations higher than 0.8 are found. This means also that in these regions the simulated precipitation is a very good predictor for the true precipitation, and thus a statistical correction of the simulated precipitation, which can include a downscaling component, can provide useful estimates for local-scale precipitation. The authors show that a simple scaling of the simulated precipitation performs well in a cross validation and thus appears to be a promising alternative to standard statistical downscaling approaches.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Atmospheric Modeling, Data Assimilation and Predictability
Kalnay, E. (2002) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511802270 · Cited by 3,391 · cited 2×
“Although such corrections are a form of statistical downscaling as they transform GCM output to small-scale estimates, the approach, which is generally known as MOS, is different from standard perfect-prog downscaling (Kalnay 2003; Zwiers and Von Storch 2004; Wilks 2006).”
BackgroundRelationships between precipitation and surface temperature
Trenberth, K. E., & Shea, D. J. (2005) · Geophysical Research Letters · doi:10.1029/2005gl022760 · Cited by 753 · cited 2×
“validation work (e.g., Janowiak et al. 1998; Trenberth and Shea 2005) and is considered most suitable for this analysis.”
Method
Cited by
Cannon, A. J., Sobie, S. R., & Murdock, T. Q. (2015) · Journal of Climate · doi:10.1175/jcli-d-14-00754.1 · Cited by 1,700
A trend-preserving bias correction – the ISI-MIP approach
Hempel, S., Frieler, K., Warszawski, L., Schewe, J., & Piontek, F. (2013) · Earth System Dynamics · doi:10.5194/esd-4-219-2013 · Cited by 1,238
Pour, S. H., Shahid, S., Chung, E.-S., & Wang, X.-J. (2018) · Atmospheric Research · doi:10.1016/j.atmosres.2018.06.006 · Cited by 183
Metadata
- Authors
- Eden, J. M., Widmann, M., Grawe, D., & Rast, S.
- Venue
- Journal of Climate
- Publisher
- American Meteorological Society
- Published
- 2012-06
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 3970-3984
- ISSN
- 0894-8755 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-0442
- OpenAlex
- W2095302352
- Cited by
- 193
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 9.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Skill, Correction, and Downscaling of GCM-Simulated Precipitation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1175/jcli-d-11-00254.1
- The paper
- Eden, J. M., Widmann, M., Grawe, D., & Rast, S. (2012). Skill, Correction, and Downscaling of GCM-Simulated Precipitation. Journal of Climate. https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-11-00254.1
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.