2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.jher.2016.03.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of different statistical downscaling methods for climate change rainfall projections over the Lake Victoria basin considering CMIP3 and CMIP5

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
65
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

3
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 81 publications
(65 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
0
65
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This eludes the possibility of having very high perturbation factors and consequently unrealistic future perturbed precipitation. The computations closely followed the methodology described in detail by Onyutha et al [32].…”
Section: Simplified Quantile Perturbation Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…This eludes the possibility of having very high perturbation factors and consequently unrealistic future perturbed precipitation. The computations closely followed the methodology described in detail by Onyutha et al [32].…”
Section: Simplified Quantile Perturbation Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…GCM simulations cannot be used directly as input to study projected future changes on catchments since GCM data are available at coarse spatial resolution only [32]. It is, therefore, important to downscale the GCM outputs such as rainfall and temperature to remove the bias before using them to study catchment responses.…”
Section: Climate Change Rainfall Projectionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations