Abstract
The forecast of snow avalanches in the Himalayan region has critical importance due to repetitive hazard scenarios and huge loss of property and lives. In recent years, avalanche forecast models have been developed using meteorological data collected from surface observatories (SO) at Defence Geoinformatics Research Establishment (erstwhile Snow and Avalanche Study Establishment (SASE) and now DGRE), India. For operational forecasting, outputs of a Weather Research Forecasting (WRF) model are used in real-time. The objective of this study is to determine a suitable bias correction approach for three key variables: mean temperature (T), relative humidity (RH), and wind speed (WS) which can be implemented in the operational forecast services at four observatory stations in Himachal Pradesh, India. We consider data of seven cold seasons (November–April) from 2011 to 2018 obtained from SO and WRF model output. Three quantile-based bias-correction approaches: Quantile Mapping (QM), Quantile–Quantile Mapping (QQ), and Quantile–Delta Mapping (QD), have been applied. In applying the QD method, two types of delta terms: multiplicative and additive, have been experimented according to the density distribution of the data. For evaluation, a leave-one-season-out-cross-validation approach is used. The results indicate that the QM and QD methods significantly reduced the bias associated with the mean temperature, relative humidity, and wind speed, whereas the performance of QQ method has limitations for all the variables. Furthermore, to meet the objective of generating bias-corrected data for operational forecasting services, uniform parameter set is generated for each variable associated with all the observatory stations. This approach is effective only for temperature, and for other variables, the improvements were not significant, mainly because of the high topographical variability in the Himalayan terrain.
References
Ahmed K F, Wang G and Silander J 2013 Statistical downscaling and bias correction of climate model outputs for climate change impact assessment in the US northeast; Glob. Planet Change 100 320–332, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2012.11.003.
Cannon A J 2016 Multivariate bias correction of climate model output: Matching marginal distributions and intervariable dependence structure; J. Clim. 29 7045–7064, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0679.1.
Cannon A J 2017 Multivariate quantile mapping bias correction: An N-dimensional probability density function transform for climate model simulations of multiple variables; Clim. Dyn. 50 31–49, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-017-3580-6.
Cannon A J, Sobie S R and Murdock T Q 2015 Bias correction of GCM precipitation by quantile mapping: How well do methods preserve changes in quantiles and extremes?; J. Clim. 28 6938–6959, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00754.1.
Cui B, Toth Z, Zhu Y and Hou D 2012 Bias correction for global ensemble forecast; Wea. Forecast. 27 396–410, https://doi.org/10.1175/WAF-D-11-00011.1.
Dai A, Washington W M and Meehl G A 2004 The ACPI Climate Change Simulations; Clim. Change 62 29–43, https://doi.org/10.1023/B:CLIM.0000013679.74883.e6.
Dar M U D, Aggarwal R and Kaur S 2018 Comparing bias correction methods in downscaling meteorological variables for climate change impact study in Ludhiana, Punjab; J. Agrometeorol. 20 126–130.
Devi U, Shekhar M S and Singh G P 2021 Correction of mesoscale model daily precipitation data over Northwestern Himalaya; Theor. Appl. Climatol. 143 51–60, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-020-03409-8.
Dimri A P 2021 Bias correction demonstration in two of the Indian Himalayan river basins; J. Water Clim. Change 12 1297–1309, https://doi.org/10.2166/wcc.2020.119.
Dudhia J 2014 A history of mesoscale model development; Asia-Pacific J. Atmos. Sci. 50 121–131, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13143-014-0031-8.
Haddeland I, Heinke J and Voß F 2012 Effects of climate model radiation, humidity and wind estimates on hydrological simulations; Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 16 305–318, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-305-2012.
Hagemann S, Chen C and Haerter J O 2011 Impact of a statistical bias correction on the projected hydrological changes obtained from three GCMs and two hydrology models; J. Hydrometeorol. 12 556–578, https://doi.org/10.1175/2011jhm1336.1.
Hempel S, Frieler K and Warszawski L 2013 A trend-preserving bias correction – The ISI-MIP approach; Earth Syst. Dyn. 4 219–236, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-4-219-2013.
Hwang S and Graham W D 2014 Assessment of alternative methods for statistically downscaling daily GCM precipitation outputs to simulate regional streamflow; J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 50 1010–1032, https://doi.org/10.1111/jawr.12154.
Iorio J P, Duffy P B and Govindasamy B 2004 Effects of model resolution and subgrid-scale physics on the simulation of precipitation in the continental United States; Clim. Dyn. 23 243–258, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-004-0440-y.
Kumar S and Srivastava P K 2018 Geospatial modelling and mapping of snow avalanche susceptibility; J. Indian Soc. Rem. Sens. 46 109–119, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12524-017-0672-z.
Lafon T, Dadson S, Buys G and Prudhomme C 2013 Bias correction of daily precipitation simulated by a regional climate model: A comparison of methods; Int. J. Climatol. 33 1367–1381, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.3518.
Laxton S C and Smith D J 2009 Dendrochronological reconstruction of snow avalanche activity in the Lahul Himalaya, Northern India; Nat. Hazards 49 459–467, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-008-9288-5.
Li D, Feng J and Xu Z 2019 Statistical bias correction for simulated wind speeds over CORDEX-East Asia; Earth Space Sci. 6 200–211, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018EA000493.
Mehrotra R and Sharma A 2016 A multivariate quantile-matching bias correction approach with auto- and cross-dependence across multiple time scales: Implications for downscaling; J. Clim. 29 3519–3539, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0356.1.
Piani C, Weedon G P and Best M 2010 Statistical bias correction of global simulated daily precipitation and temperature for the application of hydrological models; J. Hydrol. 395 199–215, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2010.10.024.
Richardson S D and Reynolds J M 2000 An overview of glacial hazards in the Himalayas; Quat. Int. 65 31–47, https://doi.org/10.1016/s1040-6182(99)00035-x.
Robin Y, Vrac M, Naveau P and Yiou P 2019 Multivariate stochastic bias corrections with optimal transport; Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 23 773–786, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-773-2019.
Sennikovs J and Bethers U 2009 Statistical downscaling method of regional climate model results for hydrological modelling; In: Proc. 18th World IMACS/MODSIM Congress, Cairns, Australia. Citeseer, pp. 3962–3968.
Sharma S S and Ganju A 2000 Complexities of avalanche forecasting in Western Himalaya – an overview; Cold Regions Sci. Technol. 31 95–102, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-232X(99)00034-8.
Shekhar M S, Kumar M S, Joshi P and Ganju A 2014 Mountain weather research and forecasting over Western and Central Himalaya by using Mesoscale Models; Int. J. Earth Atmos. Sci. 1 71–84.
Singh D K, Mishra V D and Gusain H S 2020 Simulation and analysis of a snow avalanche accident in Lower Western Himalaya, India; J. Indian Soc. Rem. Sens. 48 1555–1565, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12524-020-01178-5.
Skamarock W C, Klemp J B and Dudhia J B 2008 A description of the advanced research WRF Version 3; NCAR Tech. Note NCAR/TN-475+STR, 113, https://doi.org/10.5065/D68S4MVH.
Smitha P S, Narasimhan B, Sudheer K P and Annamalai H 2018 An improved bias correction method of daily rainfall data using a sliding window technique for climate change impact assessment; J. Hydrol. 556 100–118, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.11.010.
Srivastava P K, Islam T and Gupta M 2015 WRF dynamical downscaling and bias correction schemes for NCEP estimated hydro-meteorological variables; Water Resour. Manag. 29 2267–2284, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-015-0940-z.
Sun L, Li H and Zebiak S E 2006 An operational dynamical downscaling prediction system for Nordeste Brazil and the 2002–04 real-time forecast evaluation; J. Clim. 19(10) 1990–2007, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI3715.1.
Teutschbein C and Seibert J 2012 Bias correction of regional climate model simulations for hydrological climate-change impact studies: Review and evaluation of different methods; J. Hydrol. 456–457 12–29, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.05.052.
Van Peursem K, Hendrikx J and Birkeland K 2016 Validation of a coupled weather and snowpack model across western Montana; Conference on International Snow Science Workshop, Breckenridge, Colorado.
Wood A W, Maurer E P, Kumar A and Lettenmaier D P 2002 Long-range experimental hydrologic forecasting for the eastern United States; J. Geophys. Res. 107(D20) 4429, https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD000659.
Zscheischler J, Fischer E M and Lange S 2019 The effect of univariate bias adjustment on multivariate hazard estimates; Earth Syst. Dyn. 10 31–43, https://doi.org/10.5194/ESD-10-31-2019.
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge the Defence Geoinformatics Research Establishment (DGRE) (previously Snow and Avalanche Study Establishment (SASE)), Chandigarh, for providing the data used in this study as part of a collaborative project (MPG/SO/2017-18/11101/87/Gen (R)) awarded to Sanjeev Kumar Jha. The completion of the analysis and the manuscript preparation was supported by the Scheme for Transformational and Advanced Research in Sciences (MoE-STARS) [grant number: STARS/APR2019/DS/391/FS] awarded to Sanjeev Kumar Jha. We thank two reviewers for their valuable comments, which improved the quality of the manuscript significantly.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Ms Nibedita Samal conceptualized the work with the help of Dr Sanjeev Kumar Jha. Ms Nibedita Samal performed all the analysis and prepared the manuscript. Dr Sanjeev Kumar Jha assisted in editing and finalizing the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Additional information
Communicated by Aparna Shukla
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Samal, N., Jha, S.K. Bias correction of WRF output for operational avalanche forecasting in the Indian Himalayan region. J Earth Syst Sci 131, 156 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-022-01899-w
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-022-01899-w