Orographic control on bias and uncertainty in extreme sub-daily precipitation simulations from a convection-permitting ensemble

• Elevation strongly influences extreme precipitation biases across complex terrains. • Errors in extreme precipitation simulation increase with decreasing rainfall duration. • Normalised sampling uncertainty ranges between 12% and 19%. • Inter-model uncertainty dominates at short durations in complex terrains. Climate change adaptation strategies and flood risk management in complex terrain rely on accurate projections of sub-daily precipitation extremes and on the realistic evaluation of the associated uncertainty. However, these aspects are still insufficiently analysed, especially concerning the most updated convection-permitting climate models (CPM). This study provides a comprehensive approach to assess the performance of CPMs in complex terrain by analysing bias and uncertainty of sub-daily extreme precipitation. We evaluate extreme sub-daily precipitation in the north-eastern Italian Alps using an ensemble of CPM simulations. We assess return levels for 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, and 100-year return periods across five durations (1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 h) and associated uncertainty. We compare estimates based on CPM simulations with the ones based on rain gauge observations. Our results show that CPM performance improves with longer durations, with underestimations in the lowlands and overestimations in the highlands, particularly for short durations. The CPM ensemble captures the orographic effect, although with a weaker magnitude with respect to what is observed. We quantify intra-model, inter-model, and total uncertainties, finding that inter-model uncertainty dominates, particularly at higher elevations for short durations. The normalised intra-model uncertainty ranges between 12% and 18% and matches well the observed uncertainty for the different elevation ranges, suggesting that the sampling uncertainties are, on average, roughly proportional to the return level values (and the relevant biases). This work provides critical insights into the performance of CPMs in complex terrain and has important implications for improving the accuracy of extreme precipitation estimations, which are crucial for climate change adaptation and flood risk management in mountainous regions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Hydrology
Published
2025-04-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2025.133324
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Climate variability and models
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
5.53

Funders

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

Orographic control on bias and uncertainty in extreme sub-daily precipitation simulations from a convection-permitting ensemble

Marco Borga, Giorgia Fosser, Francesco Marra, Eleonora Dallan et al.
5 citations
Journal of Hydrology
Climate variability and models
5.53
article

Orographic control on bias and uncertainty in extreme sub-daily precipitation simulations from a convection-permitting ensemble

Marco Borga, Giorgia Fosser, Francesco Marra, Eleonora Dallan, Nathalia Correa-Sánchez
article en
5 citations

Abstract

• Elevation strongly influences extreme precipitation biases across complex terrains. • Errors in extreme precipitation simulation increase with decreasing rainfall duration. • Normalised sampling uncertainty ranges between 12% and 19%. • Inter-model uncertainty dominates at short durations in complex terrains. Climate change adaptation strategies and flood risk management in complex terrain rely on accurate projections of sub-daily precipitation extremes and on the realistic evaluation of the associated uncertainty. However, these aspects are still insufficiently analysed, especially concerning the most updated convection-permitting climate models (CPM). This study provides a comprehensive approach to assess the performance of CPMs in complex terrain by analysing bias and uncertainty of sub-daily extreme precipitation. We evaluate extreme sub-daily precipitation in the north-eastern Italian Alps using an ensemble of CPM simulations. We assess return levels for 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, and 100-year return periods across five durations (1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 h) and associated uncertainty. We compare estimates based on CPM simulations with the ones based on rain gauge observations. Our results show that CPM performance improves with longer durations, with underestimations in the lowlands and overestimations in the highlands, particularly for short durations. The CPM ensemble captures the orographic effect, although with a weaker magnitude with respect to what is observed. We quantify intra-model, inter-model, and total uncertainties, finding that inter-model uncertainty dominates, particularly at higher elevations for short durations. The normalised intra-model uncertainty ranges between 12% and 18% and matches well the observed uncertainty for the different elevation ranges, suggesting that the sampling uncertainties are, on average, roughly proportional to the return level values (and the relevant biases). This work provides critical insights into the performance of CPMs in complex terrain and has important implications for improving the accuracy of extreme precipitation estimations, which are crucial for climate change adaptation and flood risk management in mountainous regions.

Journal of HydrologyVol. 659
University of Padua (IT), Istituto Universitario di Studi Superiori di Pavia (IT)
Fondazione Cassa di Risparmio di Padova e Rovigo
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Climate variability and models
5.53
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.