The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Bias correction can modify climate model simulated precipitation changes without adverse effect on the ensemble mean
Open accessAbstract
Abstract. When applied to remove climate model biases in precipitation, quantile mapping can in some settings modify the simulated difference in mean precipitation between two eras. This has important implications when the precipitation is used to drive an impacts model that is sensitive to changes in precipitation. The tendency of quantile mapping to alter model-predicted changes is demonstrated using synthetic precipitation distributions and elucidated with a simple theoretical analysis, which shows that the alteration of model-predicted changes can be controlled by the ratio of model to observed variance. To further evaluate the effects of quantile mapping in a more realistic setting, we use daily precipitation output from 11 atmospheric general circulation models (AGCMs), forced by observed sea surface temperatures, over the conterminous United States to compare precipitation differences before and after quantile mapping bias correction. The effectiveness of the bias correction is not assessed, only its effect on precipitation differences. The change in seasonal mean (winter, DJF, and summer, JJA) precipitation between two historical periods is compared to examine whether the bias correction tends to amplify or diminish an AGCM's simulated precipitation change. In some cases the trend modification can be as large as the original simulated change, though the areas where this occurs varies among AGCMs so the ensemble median shows smaller trend modification. Results show that quantile mapping improves the correspondence with observed changes in some locations and degrades it in others. While not representative of a future where natural precipitation variability is much smaller than that due to external forcing, these results suggest that at least for the next several decades the influence of quantile mapping on seasonal precipitation trends does not systematically degrade projected differences.
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
An Overview of CMIP5 and the Experiment Design
Taylor, K. E., Stouffer, R. J., & Meehl, G. A. (2012) · Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society · doi:10.1175/bams-d-11-00094.1 · Cited by 14,052
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
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
Improved Bias Correction Techniques for Hydrological Simulations of Climate Change*
Pierce, D. W., Cayan, D. R., Maurer, E. P., Abatzoglou, J. T., & Hegewisch, K. C. (2015) · Journal of Hydrometeorology · doi:10.1175/jhm-d-14-0236.1 · Cited by 332
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Maurer, E. P., & Pierce, D. W.
- Venue
- Hydrology and Earth System Sciences
- Publisher
- Copernicus GmbH
- Published
- 2014-03-07
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 915-925
- ISSN
- 1027-5606 (ISSN-L)
- 1607-7938
- OpenAlex
- W1986782592
- Cited by
- 191
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 11.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Bias correction can modify climate model simulated precipitation changes without adverse effect on the ensemble mean. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5194/hess-18-915-2014
- The paper
- Maurer, E. P., & Pierce, D. W. (2014). Bias correction can modify climate model simulated precipitation changes without adverse effect on the ensemble mean. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-915-2014
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.