The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Scaled distribution mapping: a bias correction method that preserves raw climate model projected changes
Open accessAbstract
Abstract. Commonly used bias correction methods such as quantile mapping (QM) assume the function of error correction values between modeled and observed distributions are stationary or time invariant. This article finds that this function of the error correction values cannot be assumed to be stationary. As a result, QM lacks justification to inflate/deflate various moments of the climate change signal. Previous adaptations of QM, most notably quantile delta mapping (QDM), have been developed that do not rely on this assumption of stationarity. Here, we outline a methodology called scaled distribution mapping (SDM), which is conceptually similar to QDM, but more explicitly accounts for the frequency of rain days and the likelihood of individual events. The SDM method is found to outperform QM, QDM, and detrended QM in its ability to better preserve raw climate model projected changes to meteorological variables such as temperature and precipitation.
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
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
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
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 · cited 1×
“Hempel et al. (2013) and Bürger et al. (2013) both used a form of detrended QM (DETQM) that better preserved monthly trends, but the daily values still are subject to the stationarity assumption, which can ultimately result in altering the raw modeled projected change.”
Christensen, J. H., Boberg, F., Christensen, O. B., & Lucas‐Picher, P. (2008) · Geophysical Research Letters · doi:10.1029/2008gl035694 · Cited by 729
Cited by
How soil erosion model conceptualization affects soil loss projections under climate change
Eekhout, J. P., & De Vente, J. (2020) · Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment · doi:10.1177/0309133319871937 · Cited by 56
Metadata
- Authors
- Switanek, M. B., Troch, P. A., Castro, C. L., Leuprecht, A., Chang, H.-I., Mukherjee, R., & Demaria, E. M. C.
- Venue
- Hydrology and Earth System Sciences
- Publisher
- Copernicus GmbH
- Published
- 2017-06-06
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 2649-2666
- ISSN
- 1027-5606 (ISSN-L)
- 1607-7938
- OpenAlex
- W2519924701
- Cited by
- 257
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 7.66
- 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: Scaled distribution mapping: a bias correction method that preserves raw climate model projected changes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5194/hess-21-2649-2017
- The paper
- Switanek, M. B., Troch, P. A., Castro, C. L., Leuprecht, A., Chang, H.-I., Mukherjee, R., & Demaria, E. M. C. (2017). Scaled distribution mapping: a bias correction method that preserves raw climate model projected changes. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-2649-2017
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.
