State-of-the-art bias correction of climate models misrepresent climate science and misinform adaptation

Abstract Quantile mapping based bias correction and spatial disaggregation (BCSD) have emerged as the de facto standard for rectifying bias and scale-mismatch in global climate models (GCMs) leading to novel climate science insights and new information for impacts and adaptation. Focusing on critical variables crucial for understanding climate dynamics in India and the United States, our evaluation challenges the premise of BCSD approach. We find that BCSD overcorrects GCM simulations to observed patterns while minimizing or even nullifying science-informed projections generated by GCMs. Furthermore, we show that BCSD incorrectly captures extremes and complex climate signals. Our evaluation in the context of the Walker circulation suggests that this inability to adequately capture multivariate and spatial-temporal dependence patterns may at least partially explain the challenges with BCSD.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Environmental Research Letters
Published
2024-08-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ad6d82
Citations
9
Primary Topic
Climate variability and models
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.54

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

State-of-the-art bias correction of climate models misrepresent climate science and misinform adaptation

Udit Bhatia, Vikram Chandel, Subimal Ghosh, Auroop R. Ganguly
9 citations
Environmental Research Letters
Climate variability and models
2.54
article

State-of-the-art bias correction of climate models misrepresent climate science and misinform adaptation

Udit Bhatia, Vikram Chandel, Subimal Ghosh, Auroop R. Ganguly
article en
9 citations

Abstract

Abstract Quantile mapping based bias correction and spatial disaggregation (BCSD) have emerged as the de facto standard for rectifying bias and scale-mismatch in global climate models (GCMs) leading to novel climate science insights and new information for impacts and adaptation. Focusing on critical variables crucial for understanding climate dynamics in India and the United States, our evaluation challenges the premise of BCSD approach. We find that BCSD overcorrects GCM simulations to observed patterns while minimizing or even nullifying science-informed projections generated by GCMs. Furthermore, we show that BCSD incorrectly captures extremes and complex climate signals. Our evaluation in the context of the Walker circulation suggests that this inability to adequately capture multivariate and spatial-temporal dependence patterns may at least partially explain the challenges with BCSD.

Environmental Research LettersVol. 19(9)
Northeastern University (US), Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (US), Indian Institute of Technology Bombay (IN), Indian Institute of Technology Gandhinagar (IN)
U.S. Department of Defense, Department of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, India, Science and Engineering Research Board
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Climate variability and models
2.54
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

State-of-the-art bias correction of climate models misrepresent climate science and misinform adaptation — Udit Bhatia, Vikram Chandel, et al. · Environmental Research Letters (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS