The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Multivariate—Intervariable, Spatial, and Temporal—Bias Correction*
Open accessAbstract
Statistical methods to bias correct global or regional climate model output are now common to get data closer to observations in distribution. However, most bias correction (BC) methods work for one variable and one location at a time and basically reproduce the temporal structure of the models. The intervariable, spatial, and temporal dependencies of the corrected data are usually poor compared to observations. Here, the authors propose a novel method for multivariate BC. The empirical copula–bias correction (EC–BC) combines a one-dimensional BC with a shuffling technique that restores an empirical multidimensional copula. Several BC methods are investigated and compared to high-resolution reference data over the French Mediterranean basin: notably, (i) a 1D BC method applied independently to precipitation and temperature fields, (ii) a recent conditional correction approach developed for producing correct two-dimensional intervariable structures, and (iii) the EC–BC method. Assessments are realized in terms of intervariable, spatial, and temporal dependencies, and an objective evaluation using the integrated quadratic distance (IQD) is presented. As expected, the 1D methods cannot produce correct multidimensional properties. The conditional technique appears efficient for intervariable properties but not for spatial and temporal dependencies. EC–BC provides realistic dependencies in all respects: intervariable, spatial, and temporal. The IQD results are clearly in favor of EC–BC. As many BC methods, EC–BC relies on a stationarity assumption and is only able to reproduce patterns inherited from historical data. However, because of its ease of coding, its speed of application, and the quality of its results, the EC–BC method is a very good candidate for all needs in multivariate bias correction.
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
Gudmundsson, L., Bremnes, J. B., Haugen, J. E., & Engen-Skaugen, T. (2012) · Hydrology and Earth System Sciences · doi:10.5194/hess-16-3383-2012 · Cited by 1,318
Piani, C., Weedon, G. P., Best, M., Gomes, S. M., Viterbo, P., Hagemann, S., & Haerter, J. O. (2010) · Journal of Hydrology · doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2010.10.024 · Cited by 868
Christensen, J. H., Boberg, F., Christensen, O. B., & Lucas‐Picher, P. (2008) · Geophysical Research Letters · doi:10.1029/2008gl035694 · Cited by 729
Cited by
Future climate risk from compound events
Zscheischler, J., Westra, S., van den Hurk, B. J. J. M., Seneviratne, S. I., Ward, P. J., Pitman, A., AghaKouchak, A., Bresch, D. N., Leonard, M., Wahl, T., et al. (2018) · Nature Climate Change · doi:10.1038/s41558-018-0156-3 · Cited by 2,527
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
Metadata
- Authors
- Vrac, M., & Friederichs, P.
- Venue
- Journal of Climate
- Publisher
- American Meteorological Society
- Published
- 2014-12-31
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 218-237
- ISSN
- 0894-8755 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-0442
- OpenAlex
- W2035756389
- Cited by
- 236
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 9.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Multivariate—Intervariable, Spatial, and Temporal—Bias Correction*. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1175/jcli-d-14-00059.1
- The paper
- Vrac, M., & Friederichs, P. (2015). Multivariate—Intervariable, Spatial, and Temporal—Bias Correction*. Journal of Climate. https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-14-00059.1
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.