2017
DOI: 10.1007/s00382-017-3645-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluations of high-resolution dynamically downscaled ensembles over the contiguous United States

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
38
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 40 publications
(39 citation statements)
references
References 84 publications
0
38
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Future climate scenarios were first generated by a 12‐km regional climate model (WRF versions 3.3.1) and then linearly interpolated into 10‐km resolution. The initial and boundary conditions for WRF were collected from three different global climate models (GCMs) from the fifth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) archive (Wang & Kotamarthi, ; Zobel et al ., under review). These are Community Climate System Model, version 4 (CCSM4), Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Earth System Model with Generalized Ocean Layer Dynamics component (GFDL‐ESG2G) and the Hadley Centre Global Environment Model, version 2‐Earth System (HadGEM2‐ES).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Future climate scenarios were first generated by a 12‐km regional climate model (WRF versions 3.3.1) and then linearly interpolated into 10‐km resolution. The initial and boundary conditions for WRF were collected from three different global climate models (GCMs) from the fifth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) archive (Wang & Kotamarthi, ; Zobel et al ., under review). These are Community Climate System Model, version 4 (CCSM4), Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory Earth System Model with Generalized Ocean Layer Dynamics component (GFDL‐ESG2G) and the Hadley Centre Global Environment Model, version 2‐Earth System (HadGEM2‐ES).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In order to understand the uncertainties in future projections, it is important to also carefully evaluate the biases in historical periods (Bukovsky, ; Christensen et al, ; Loikith et al, ; Lorenz & Jacob, ; Wang & Kotamarthi, ; Zobel et al, ). Zobel et al () have conducted a historical evaluation of this ensemble used in this study, using several metrics to evaluate the biases present in both the climatological mean as well as the temperature extremes from 1995 to 2004. In addition to this research, prior downscaling studies have used ensembles to enhance understanding of future climatology and extreme value uncertainties.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Precipitation data from these gauges are gridded to true18° resolution using a mapping algorithm from Shepard (). Widmann and Bretherton () were the first to implement this technique (see Zobel et al, , for more details). After this, we regridded the original ESM data to match the spatial resolution of the observations and RCM simulations for comparison.…”
Section: Model and Validation Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…ESMs do well at representing large‐scale precipitation patterns on a seasonal and yearly timescale (e.g., IPCC, ; Hayhoe et al, ; Sheffield, Barrett, et al, ; Sheffield, Camargo, et al, ). However, current models have spatial resolutions that are too coarse to adequately capture extreme precipitation events in local areas or seasonal precipitation patterns in areas of complex terrain (Hayhoe et al, ; Liang et al, ; Racherla et al, ; Wang et al, ; Zobel et al, ). For example, mesoscale convective systems result in as much as 60% of seasonal rainfall in the central United States during the spring and summer, but existing ESM results lack the high spatial resolution needed to simulate these events accurately.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%