Abstract
Climate change projections are commonly based on multi-model ensembles of climate simulations. In this paper we consider the choice of bias models in Bayesian multimodel predictions. Buser et al. (Clim Res 44(2–3):227–241, 2010a) introduced a hybrid bias model which combines commonly used constant bias and constant relation bias assumptions. The hybrid model includes a weighting parameter which balances these bias models. In this study, we use a cross-validation approach to study which bias model or bias parameter leads to, in a specific sense, optimal climate change projections. The analysis is carried out for summer and winter season means of 2 m-temperatures spatially averaged over the IPCC SREX regions, using 19 model runs from the CMIP5 data set. The cross-validation approach is applied to calculate optimal bias parameters (in the specific sense) for projecting the temperature change from the control period (1961–2005) to the scenario period (2046–2090). The results are compared to the results of the Buser et al. (Clim Res 44(2–3):227–241, 2010a) method which includes the bias parameter as one of the unknown parameters to be estimated from the data.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Figures S35−S61 in the supplementary material show the estimates for each region and also estimates of the 2D joint histogram of the parameters \(\varDelta \mu\) and \(\kappa\) for each region.
References
Bellprat O, Kotlarski S, Lüthi D, Schär C (2013) Physical constraints for temperature biases in climate models. Geophys Res Lett 40:4042–4047
Boberg F, Christensen J (2012) Overestimation of mediterranean summer temperature projections due to model deficiencies. Nat Clim Change 2:433–436
Buser C, Künsch H, Lüthi D, Wild M, Schär C (2009) Bayesian multi-model projection of climate: bias assumptions and interannual variability. Clim Dyn 33(6):849–868. doi:10.1007/s00382-009-0588-6
Buser C, Künsch H, Schär C (2010a) Bayesian multi-model projections of climate: generalization and application to ensembles results. Clim Res 44(2–3):227–241
Buser C, Künsch H, Weber A (2010b) Biases and uncertainty in climate projections. Scand J Stat 37:179–199
Candille G, Talagrand O (2005) Evaluation of probabilistic prediction systems for a scalar variable. Q J R Meteorol Soc 131:2131–2150
Christensen J, Boberg F (2012) Temperature dependent climate projection deficiencies in CMIP5 models. Geophys Res Lett 39(L24):705
Christensen J, Boberg F (2013) Correction to temperature dependent climate projection deficiencies in CMIP5 models. Geophys Res Lett 40:2307–2308
Christensen J, Boberg F, Christensen O, Lucas-Picher P (2008) On the need for bias correction of regional climate change projections of temperature and precipitation. Geophys Res Lett 35(L20):709
Gelman A, Carlin J, Stern H, Rubin D (2003) Bayesian data analysis, 2nd edn. Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton
Gilks W, Richardson S, Spiegelhalter D (1996) Markov chain Monte Carlo in practice. Chapmann & Hall, Boca Raton
Gneiting T, Raftery A (2007) Strictly proper scoring rules, prediction, and estimation. Am Stat Assoc 102:359–378
Grimit EP, Gneiting T, Berrocal VJ, Johnson NA (2006) The continuous ranked probability score for circular variables and its application to mesoscale forecast ensemble verification. Q J R Meteorol Soc 132:2925–2942
Harris I, Jones P, Osborn T, Lister D (2014) Updated high-resolution grids of monthly climatic observations the CRU TS3.10 dataset. Int J Climatol 34(3):623–642
Heaton M, Greasby T, Sain S (2013) Modeling uncertainty in climate using ensembles of regional and global climate models and multiple observation-based data sets. SIAM/ASA J Uncertain Quantif 1:535–559
Hersbach H (2000) Decomposition of the continuous ranked probability score for ensemble prediction systems. Weather Forecast 15:559–570
Ho C, Stephenson D, Collins M, Ferro C, Brown S (2012) Calibration strategies: a source of additional uncertainty in climate change projections. Bull Amer Meteor Soc 93:21–26
Jolliffe I, Stephenson D (eds) (2011) Forecast verification: a practitioner’s guide in atmospheric science, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York
Kerkhoff C, Künsch H, Schär C (2014) Assessment of bias assumptions for climate models. J Clim 27(17):6799–6918
Maraun D (2012) Nonstationarities of regional climate model biases in European seasonal mean temperature and precipitation sums. Geophys Res Lett 39(L06):706
McQuarrie A, Tsai CL (1998) Regression and time series model selection. World Scientific, Singapore
Räisänen J, Ylhäisi J (2012) Can model weighting improve probabilistic projections of climate change? Clim Dyn 39:1981–1998
Räisänen J, Ruokolainen L, Ylhäisi J (2010) Weighting of model results for improving best estimates of climate change. Clim Dyn 35:407–422
Seneviratne S, Nicholls N, Easterling D, Goodess C, Kanae S, Kossin J, Luo Y, Marengo J, McInnes K, Rahimi M, Reichstein M, Sorteberg A, Vera C, Zhang X (2012) Changes in climate extremes and their impacts on the natural physical environment. In: IPCC (ed) Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change adaptation. A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), pp 109–230
Smith R, Tebaldi C, Nychka D, Mearns L (2009) Bayesian modeling of uncertainty in ensembles of climate models. J Am Stat Assoc 104:97–116
Stanski H, Wilson L, Burrows W (1989) Survey of common verification methods in meteorology. Research report 89-5, Atmospheric Environment Service Forecast Research Division, Canada
Tebaldi C, Knutti R (2007) The use of the multi-model ensemble in probabilistic climate projections. Philos Trans R Soc A 365:2053–2075
Tebaldi C, Sansó B (2009) Joint projections of temperature and precipitation change from multiple climate models: a hierarchical bayesian approach. J R Stat Soc A 172:83–106
Tebaldi C, Smith R, Mearns DNL (2005) Quantifying uncertainty in projection of regional climate change: a bayesian approach to the analysis of multimodel ensembles. J Clim 18:1524–1540
Thomson AM, Calvin KV, Smith SJ, Kyle GP, Volke A, Patel P, Delgado-Arias S, Bond-Lamberty B, Wise MA, Clarke LE, Edmonds JA (2011) RCP4.5: a pathway for stabilization of radiative forcing by 2100. Clim Change 109(1–2):77–94. doi:10.1007/s10584-011-0151-4
Weigel A, Liniger M, Appenzeller C (2008) Can multi-model combination really enhance the prediction skill of probabilistic ensemble forecasts? Q J R Meteorol Soc 134:241–260
Wilks D (2006) Comparison of ensemble-MOS methods in the Lorenz 96 setting. Meteorol Appl 13:243–256
Acknowledgments
This work has been supported by strategic funding of the University of Eastern Finland and funding of Academy of Finland (application numbers 213476, 250215 AND 272041, Finnish Programme for Center of Excellence in Research 2006–2011, 2012–2017 AND 2014–2019). We acknowledge the World Climate Research Programme’s Working Group on Coupled Modelling, which is responsible for CMIP, and we thank the climate modeling groups (listed in Table 2 of this paper) for producing and making available their model output. For CMIP the U.S. Department of Energy’s Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison provides coordinating support and led development of software infrastructure in partnership with the Global Organization for Earth System Science Portals.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Appendix
Appendix
1.1 Continuous ranked probability score
Let x be a scalar variable (e.g. 2 m-temperature). Suppose that a probability function forecast of x is given by p(x) and we have also an observation \(x^{\text {obs}}\) of the x. The Continuous Ranked Probability Score (CRPS) (Stanski et al. 1989; Hersbach 2000; Candille and Talagrand 2005; Grimit et al. 2006) is defined as
where \(P^{\text {pred}}(x)=\int _{-\infty }^x p(x'){\,\mathrm d}x'\) is the cumulative distribution function of p(x) and \(P^{\text {obs}}\) is the cumulative distribution function for the observation:
where H is the Heaviside function (\(H(x)=1\) if \(x\ge 0\) and 0 otherwise).
In this paper, the “distance” between the predictions of the future temperatures \(Y_{0,t}\) (when \(\ell\)’th model is taken as the “truth” in the cross-validation) and the actual future temperatures \(Y_{\ell ,t}\) is measured using the CRPS. The (total) CRPS score is calculated as the mean of CRPSs calculated for every year \(t=1,\ldots ,T\). By Eq. (13), the prediction distribution is a (weighted) sum of Gaussian distributions and the CRPS for such Gaussian mixture model can be calculated in closed form using an expression given in Grimit et al. (2006).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Huttunen, J.M.J., Räisänen, J., Nissinen, A. et al. Cross-validation analysis of bias models in Bayesian multi-model projections of climate. Clim Dyn 48, 1555–1570 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-016-3160-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-016-3160-1