pith. sign in

arxiv: 1906.10464 · v1 · pith:I6S76CX6new · submitted 2019-06-25 · 📊 stat.AP

New approach for stochastic downscaling and bias correction of daily mean temperatures to a high-resolution grid

Qifen Yuan , Thordis Thorarinsdottir , Stein Beldring , Wai Kwok Wong , Shaochun Huang , Chong-Yu Xu This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-25 15:59 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📊 stat.AP
keywords stochastic downscalingbias correctiondaily mean temperaturespace-time dependencequantile mappingEURO-CORDEXhigh-resolution gridcross-validation
0
0 comments X

The pith

A two-step procedure corrects biases in temperature moments then adds stochastic residuals from fine-scale dependence modeling, outperforming quantile mapping in distribution match and consistency.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper introduces a post-processing method for downscaling coarse climate projections of daily mean temperatures to a 1 km grid. It first identifies and corrects errors in the spatial and temporal features of the mean and variance at the model scale. It then fits a statistical model to the residual space-time dependence at the finer scale, draws realizations from that model, and combines them with the climate change signal. Applied to two EURO-CORDEX regional models over Norway and validated against a high-resolution observational product, cross-validation shows the results better reflect marginal distributional properties and exhibit improved space-time consistency than empirical quantile mapping.

Core claim

The procedure separates bias correction of the first two moments at coarse scale from stochastic generation of residual fine-scale variability; when the residuals are modeled and added back, the resulting fields match the marginal properties of the observational data product and maintain better spatial and temporal consistency than fields produced by empirical quantile mapping.

What carries the argument

Two-step post-processing: moment bias correction for spatial-temporal features followed by statistical modeling of residual space-time dependence to generate additive realizations.

If this is right

  • Downscaled temperature fields will match the marginal distributional properties of the high-resolution observational product more closely than quantile mapping does.
  • The fields will exhibit greater consistency across space and time than those from empirical quantile mapping.
  • Multiple realizations can be generated to represent uncertainty arising from unresolved fine-scale variability.
  • The approach applies directly to other members of the EURO-CORDEX ensemble for the same region and grid.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the stationarity assumption holds across emission scenarios, the method could be used to produce ensembles of downscaled fields that preserve scenario-specific trends without additional trend adjustment.
  • The separation of moment correction from residual modeling may reduce the risk of introducing artifacts when the same procedure is later applied to variables whose dependence structures differ from temperature.
  • Impact models that ingest daily temperature fields at 1 km resolution could receive inputs with fewer artificial spatial or temporal discontinuities than those produced by quantile mapping alone.

Load-bearing premise

The residual space-time dependence at the fine scale can be treated as stationary and separable from the climate change signal.

What would settle it

If realizations drawn from the fitted residual model, when added to the bias-corrected signal, cause the long-term temperature trends in the downscaled output to deviate from those in the original regional climate model projections, the separability assumption is falsified.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1906.10464 by Chong-Yu Xu, Qifen Yuan, Shaochun Huang, Stein Beldring, Thordis Thorarinsdottir, Wai Kwok Wong.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Our study area comprises the area of Trøndelag in central Norway. For the RCM bias correction, we consider the entire Trøndelag and a small part of neighboring Sweden, an area with 695 RCM grid cells (rectangular-like polygons) and 109 514 seNorge grid cells (within the polygons, not shown). For the stochastic downscaling, we consider nine hydrological catchments within Trøndelag with catchment areas from … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Proposed general framework for post-processing of climate model output. We propose a two-step post-processing approach for statistical bias correction and stochas￾tic downscaling as demonstrated in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Boxplots of the mean residuals Z¯ ·t = 1 S PS s=1 Zst where the mean is taken over all grid cells in catchment A which is the largest in our study area. The boxplot for each calendar day consists of all values for that calendar day in the training period 1957-1986. We assume the residual field Zt varies around a mean value of zero, so that the time series Z¯ ·t = 1 S PS s=1 Zst represents a reasonable appr… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Marginal performance of RCM raw output and three bias correction methods aggre￾gated over the RCM grid cells in the study area, as measured by the integrated quadratic distance (IQD) with a lower value indicating better performance. The marginal distribution over all days in 1987-2005 is compared to the corresponding distribution derived from the upscaled seNorge data product. Raw output and each bias corr… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Combined baseline (4) and linear trend (6) components of the estimated mean for one RCM grid cell in the study area, for the upscaled seNorge data product and the two RCMs over the training period 1957-1986 (left) and the test period 1987-2005 (right), where also the corrected estimates of the two RCMs are indicated. The estimates are standardized such that the overall mean of the data product in the train… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Integrated quadratic distance (IQD) values for marginal comparison of the daily seNorge data product and post-processed RCM model output 1987-2005 aggregated over the grid cells in each catchment. A lower value indicates a better performance. Post-processing method is indicated by color and RCM by line type. The full distributions are compared in the top left plot while comparisons focusing on the upper pa… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Parameter estimates in catchment A, Gaulfoss, in the training period 1957-1986 for the residual models in (9) and (12). Top row: The two scale parameters, σ1t , σ2t, and the location parameter µt of the split normal distribution in equation (9). Bottom row: The parameters of the exponential covariance function in (12), nugget θ0t, partial sill θ1t and range θ2t. G H I D E F A B C 0 5 10 15 0 5 10 15 0 5 10… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The temporal dependence in the nine catchments, measured by an autocorrelation function (ACF) of the average time series over the daily fields from 1987-2005, for the raw RCM output and two downscaling methods is compared to that from the seNorge data product. 15 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Spatial dependence in catchment A (Gaulfoss) in 1987-2005 by month, as measured by an empirical semi-variogram based on the daily temperature fields. The plots show empirical semi-variograms derived from the seNorge data product and two downscaled results, EQM applied to RCM2 and XstarTrend applied to RCM1. For assessing the spatial dependence structure, we focus on the largest catchment A, Gaulfoss [PITH… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: shows examples of cold and warm January days from the seNorge data product and the two post-processing methods. EQM is applied independently for each RCM grid cell and it can be seen that the resulting daily temperature fields have artificial boundaries corresponding to the RCM grid cells, while those by XstarTrend do not have such boundaries and show a spatial consistency closer to the seNorge temperatur… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In applications of climate information, coarse-resolution climate projections commonly need to be downscaled to a finer grid. One challenge of this requirement is the modeling of sub-grid variability and the spatial and temporal dependence at the finer scale. Here, a post-processing procedure is proposed for temperature projections that addresses this challenge. The procedure employs statistical bias correction and stochastic downscaling in two steps. In a first step, errors that are related to spatial and temporal features of the first two moments of the temperature distribution at model scale are identified and corrected. Secondly, residual space-time dependence at the finer scale is analyzed using a statistical model, from which realizations are generated and then combined with appropriate climate change signal to form the downscaled projection fields. Using a high-resolution observational gridded data product, the proposed approach is applied in a case study where projections of two regional climate models from the EURO-CORDEX ensemble are bias-corrected and downscaled to a 1x1 km grid in the Trondelag area of Norway. A cross-validation study shows that the proposed procedure generates results that better reflect the marginal distributional properties of the data product and have better consistency in space and time than empirical quantile mapping.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a two-step post-processing method for bias-correcting and stochastically downscaling daily mean temperature projections from coarse EURO-CORDEX RCMs to a 1 km grid. Step 1 corrects spatial/temporal biases in the first two moments at model scale; step 2 fits a statistical model to fine-scale residual space-time dependence, draws realizations, and adds them to the climate-change signal. A cross-validation against a high-resolution observational product in the Trondelag region of Norway is reported to show better marginal distributional properties and space-time consistency than empirical quantile mapping.

Significance. If the central assumptions hold, the procedure supplies a practical route to generating downscaled fields that explicitly incorporate realistic sub-grid variability and dependence, which is valuable for impact studies requiring consistent space-time structure. The use of independent high-resolution observations for validation and the focus on both marginal and dependence metrics are positive features.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract, second paragraph: the procedure adds realizations drawn from a residual model fitted at the fine scale to the projected trend, but the historical cross-validation supplies no test of whether the fitted residual covariance or higher moments remain valid when the large-scale mean state shifts. This assumption is load-bearing for the claim that the method produces improved projections.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: the cross-validation is described only qualitatively (better marginal and dependence properties than EQM) with no reported effect sizes, specific metrics, or uncertainty quantification, preventing assessment of the practical magnitude of the reported improvement.
minor comments (1)
  1. The exact functional form and estimation procedure for the statistical model of residual space-time dependence should be stated explicitly (including any stationarity or separability assumptions) to allow reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments, which have helped us identify areas for improvement in the manuscript. We provide point-by-point responses to the major comments below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract, second paragraph: the procedure adds realizations drawn from a residual model fitted at the fine scale to the projected trend, but the historical cross-validation supplies no test of whether the fitted residual covariance or higher moments remain valid when the large-scale mean state shifts. This assumption is load-bearing for the claim that the method produces improved projections.

    Authors: This is a valid observation. The cross-validation is performed on historical periods and thus cannot directly assess the behavior of the residual model under altered large-scale conditions. We will revise the manuscript to include an explicit discussion of this assumption in the methods and discussion sections, noting that it is common in statistical downscaling but represents a limitation that could be explored in future work with pseudo-reality experiments. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the cross-validation is described only qualitatively (better marginal and dependence properties than EQM) with no reported effect sizes, specific metrics, or uncertainty quantification, preventing assessment of the practical magnitude of the reported improvement.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract would benefit from more quantitative information. Although the full paper presents detailed metrics, we will update the abstract to report specific effect sizes, such as improvements in mean absolute error for quantiles or correlation coefficients for spatial dependence, to allow readers to better gauge the magnitude of the improvements. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; method uses external inputs and held-out validation

full rationale

The procedure applies bias correction to EURO-CORDEX RCM output (external) against an independent high-resolution observational gridded product. Residual dependence is fitted at fine scale and evaluated via cross-validation on historical periods. No equations reduce the reported improvements in marginal distributions or space-time consistency to quantities defined from the same fitted parameters or validation folds. The stationarity/separability assumption for future projections is an explicit modeling choice, not a self-referential definition or fitted-input prediction. No self-citation chains or ansatzes imported from prior author work are load-bearing for the central claims.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The procedure rests on standard statistical assumptions about separability of bias and residual dependence plus the availability of a high-resolution observational product; no new physical entities are introduced. Because only the abstract is available, the exact free parameters inside the residual model cannot be enumerated.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The space-time dependence structure of temperature residuals at 1 km scale can be adequately represented by a single statistical model fitted once and then used to generate realizations.
    Invoked in the second step of the procedure (abstract).

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5763 in / 1304 out tokens · 44427 ms · 2026-05-25T15:59:01.134850+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 56 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archive author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eid eprint howpublished department institution journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type url volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts #0 '...

    work page

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION if.digit duplicate "0" = swap duplicate "1" = swap duplicate "2" = swap duplicate "3" = swap duplicate "4" = swap duplicate "5" = swap duplicate "6" = swap duplicate "7" = swap duplicate "8" = swap "9" = or or or or or or or or or FUNCTION n.separate 't := "" #0 'numnames := t empty not t #-1 #1 subs...

    work page

  3. [3]

    J., 2015: fanplot : An R Package for Visualising Sequential Distributions

    Abel, G. J., 2015: fanplot : An R Package for Visualising Sequential Distributions . The R Journal, 7 (2), 15--23, ://journal.r-project.org/archive/2015-1/abel.pdf

    work page 2015

  4. [4]

    P art B : R egional A spects

    Barros, V., and Coauthors, 2014: IPCC , 2014: C limate C hange 2014: I mpacts, A daptation, and V ulnerability. P art B : R egional A spects. C ontribution of W orking G roup II to the F ifth A ssessment R eport of the I ntergovernmental P anel on C limate C hange. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA

    work page 2014

  5. [5]

    Engeland, L

    Beldring, S., K. Engeland, L. A. Roald, N. R. S lthun, and A. Voks , 2003: Estimation of parameters in a distributed precipitation-runoff model for N orway. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussions, 7 (3), 304--316

    work page 2003

  6. [6]

    Engen-Skaugen, E

    Beldring, S., T. Engen-Skaugen, E. J. F rland, and L. A. Roald, 2008: Climate change impacts on hydrological processes in N orway based on two methods for transferring regional climate model results to meteorological station sites. Tellus A: Dynamic Meteorology and Oceanography, 60 (3), 439--450

    work page 2008

  7. [7]

    J., 2016: Multivariate bias correction of climate model output: M atching marginal distributions and intervariable dependence structure

    Cannon, A. J., 2016: Multivariate bias correction of climate model output: M atching marginal distributions and intervariable dependence structure. Journal of Climate, 29 (19), 7045--7064

    work page 2016

  8. [8]

    Gangopadhyay, L

    Clark, M., S. Gangopadhyay, L. Hay, B. Rajagopalan, and R. Wilby, 2004: The S chaake shuffle: A method for reconstructing space--time variability in forecasted precipitation and temperature fields. Journal of Hydrometeorology, 5 (1), 243--262

    work page 2004

  9. [9]

    Cressie, N., and C. K. Wikle, 2015: Statistics for spatio-temporal data. John Wiley & Sons

    work page 2015

  10. [10]

    A., and Coauthors, 2013: Climate and carbon cycle changes from 1850 to 2100 in MPI-ESM simulations for the C oupled M odel I ntercomparison P roject phase 5

    Giorgetta, M. A., and Coauthors, 2013: Climate and carbon cycle changes from 1850 to 2100 in MPI-ESM simulations for the C oupled M odel I ntercomparison P roject phase 5. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 5 (3), 572--597

    work page 2013

  11. [11]

    Gneiting, T., and A. E. Raftery, 2007: Strictly proper scoring rules, prediction, and estimation. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 102 (477), 359--378

    work page 2007

  12. [12]

    Pebesma, and G

    Gräler, B., E. Pebesma, and G. Heuvelink, 2016: Spatio- T emporal I nterpolation using gstat. The R Journal, 8, 204--218, ://journal.r-project.org/archive/2016-1/na-pebesma-heuvelink.pdf

    work page 2016

  13. [13]

    R package version 1.0-4

    Gudmundsson, L., 2016: qmap: Statistical transformations for post-processing climate model output. R package version 1.0-4

    work page 2016

  14. [14]

    Bremnes, J

    Gudmundsson, L., J. Bremnes, J. Haugen, and T. Engen-Skaugen, 2012: Downscaling RCM precipitation to the station scale using statistical transformations--a comparison of methods. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 16 (9), 3383--3390

    work page 2012

  15. [15]

    Science, 346 (6216), 1461--1462

    Hall, A., 2014: Projecting regional change. Science, 346 (6216), 1461--1462

    work page 2014

  16. [16]

    Hanssen-Bauer, I., H. O. Hygen, H. Heiberg, E. Førland, and N. Berit, 2017: User needs for post processed climate data. a survey of the needs for output from the research project PostClim . Tech. Rep. 2, Norwegian Centre for Climate Services. [Available online at https://cms.met.no/site/2/klimaservicesenteret/rapporter-og-publikasjoner/_attachment/12099?_...

    work page 2017

  17. [17]

    Heinrich, C., K. H. Hellton, A. Lenkoski, and T. L. Thorarinsdottir, 2019: Postprocessing seasonal weather forecasts, under review

    work page 2019

  18. [18]

    Huybers, P., K. A. McKinnon, A. Rhines, and M. Tingley, 2014: US daily temperatures: The meaning of extremes in the context of nonnormality. Journal of Climate, 27 (19), 7368--7384

    work page 2014

  19. [19]

    ://pkg.robjhyndman.com/forecast, R package version 8.4

    Hyndman, R., and Coauthors, 2018: forecast : Forecasting functions for time series and linear models . ://pkg.robjhyndman.com/forecast, R package version 8.4

    work page 2018

  20. [20]

    Regional Environmental Change, 14 (2), 563--578

    Jacob, D., and Coauthors, 2014: EURO-CORDEX : new high-resolution climate change projections for E uropean impact research. Regional Environmental Change, 14 (2), 563--578

    work page 2014

  21. [21]

    Krueger, and S

    Jordan, A., F. Krueger, and S. Lerch, 2018: Evaluating P robabilistic F orecasts with scoring R ules. Journal of Statistical Software, forthcoming

    work page 2018

  22. [22]

    G., and Coauthors, 2007: A daily weather generator for use in climate change studies

    Kilsby, C. G., and Coauthors, 2007: A daily weather generator for use in climate change studies. Environmental Modelling & Software, 22 (12), 1705--1719

    work page 2007

  23. [23]

    Geoscientific Model Development, 7 (4), 1297--1333

    Kotlarski, S., and Coauthors, 2014: Regional climate modeling on E uropean scales: a joint standard evaluation of the EURO-CORDEX RCM ensemble. Geoscientific Model Development, 7 (4), 1297--1333

    work page 2014

  24. [24]

    Rue, and J

    Lindgren, F., H. Rue, and J. Lindstr \"o m, 2011: An explicit link between G aussian fields and G aussian M arkov random fields: the stochastic partial differential equation approach. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology), 73 (4), 423--498

    work page 2011

  25. [25]

    Saloranta, T

    Lussana, C., T. Saloranta, T. Skaugen, J. Magnusson, O. E. Tveito, and J. Andersen, 2018 a : seNorge2 daily precipitation, an observational gridded dataset over Norway from 1957 to the present day. Earth System Science Data, 10 (1), 235

    work page 2018

  26. [26]

    Tveito, and F

    Lussana, C., O. Tveito, and F. Uboldi, 2018 b : Three-dimensional spatial interpolation of two-meter temperature over Norway . Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 144 (711), 344--364

    work page 2018

  27. [27]

    Widmann, 2018: Statistical downscaling and bias correction for climate research

    Maraun, D., and M. Widmann, 2018: Statistical downscaling and bias correction for climate research. Cambridge University Press

    work page 2018

  28. [28]

    Reviews of Geophysics, 48 (3)

    Maraun, D., and Coauthors, 2010: Precipitation downscaling under climate change: Recent developments to bridge the gap between dynamical models and the end user. Reviews of Geophysics, 48 (3)

    work page 2010

  29. [29]

    Nature Climate Change, 7 (11), 764

    Maraun, D., and Coauthors, 2017: Towards process-informed bias correction of climate change simulations. Nature Climate Change, 7 (11), 764

    work page 2017

  30. [30]

    Norwegian Meteorological Institute, met no note, 19

    Mohr, M., 2009: Comparison of versions 1.1 and 1.0 of gridded temperature and precipitation data for Norway . Norwegian Meteorological Institute, met no note, 19

    work page 2009

  31. [31]

    B., 2007: An introduction to copulas

    Nelsen, R. B., 2007: An introduction to copulas. Springer Science & Business Media

    work page 2007

  32. [32]

    Journal of Statistical Software, 51 (7), 1--30, ://www.jstatsoft.org/v51/i07/

    Pebesma, E., 2012: spacetime : Spatio- T emporal D ata in R . Journal of Statistical Software, 51 (7), 1--30, ://www.jstatsoft.org/v51/i07/

    work page 2012

  33. [33]

    J., 2004: Multivariable geostatistics in S : the gstat package

    Pebesma, E. J., 2004: Multivariable geostatistics in S : the gstat package. Computers & Geosciences, 30, 683--691

    work page 2004

  34. [34]

    Haerter, 2012: Two dimensional bias correction of temperature and precipitation copulas in climate models

    Piani, C., and J. Haerter, 2012: Two dimensional bias correction of temperature and precipitation copulas in climate models. Geophysical Research Letters, 39 (20)

    work page 2012

  35. [35]

    Weedon, M

    Piani, C., G. Weedon, M. Best, S. Gomes, P. Viterbo, S. Hagemann, and J. Haerter, 2010: Statistical bias correction of global simulated daily precipitation and temperature for the application of hydrological models. Journal of hydrology, 395 (3-4), 199--215

    work page 2010

  36. [36]

    ://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lmvar, r package version 1.5.0

    Posthuma Partners , 2018: lmvar: Linear Regression with Non-Constant Variances. ://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lmvar, r package version 1.5.0

    work page 2018

  37. [37]

    Vienna, Austria, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ://www.R-project.org/

    R Core Team , 2018: R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ://www.R-project.org/

    work page 2018

  38. [38]

    a is \"a nen, J., and O. R \

    R \"a is \"a nen, J., and O. R \"a ty, 2013: Projections of daily mean temperature variability in the future: cross-validation tests with ENSEMBLES regional climate simulations. Climate dynamics, 41 (5-6), 1553--1568

    work page 2013

  39. [39]

    Will, and A

    Rockel, B., A. Will, and A. Hense, 2008: The regional climate model COSMO-CLM (CCLM) . Meteorologische Zeitschrift, 17 (4), 347--348

    work page 2008

  40. [40]

    Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 1 (1), 82--96

    Rummukainen, M., 2010: State-of-the-art with R egional C limate M odels. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 1 (1), 82--96

    work page 2010

  41. [41]

    A., and E

    Semenov, M. A., and E. M. Barrow, 1997: Use of a stochastic weather generator in the development of climate change scenarios. Climatic change, 35 (4), 397--414

    work page 1997

  42. [42]

    Thorarinsdottir, T. L., T. Gneiting, and N. Gissibl, 2013: Using proper divergence functions to evaluate climate models. SIAM/ASA Journal on Uncertainty Quantification, 1 (1), 522--534

    work page 2013

  43. [43]

    N., and B

    Venables, W. N., and B. D. Ripley, 2002: Modern A pplied S tatistics with S . 4th ed., Springer, New York, ://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/pub/MASS4, iSBN 0-387-95457-0

    work page 2002

  44. [44]

    Climate Dynamics, 40 (9-10), 2091--2121

    Voldoire, A., and Coauthors, 2013: The CNRM-CM5.1 global climate model: description and basic evaluation. Climate Dynamics, 40 (9-10), 2091--2121

    work page 2013

  45. [45]

    Maraun, M

    Volosciuk, C., D. Maraun, M. Vrac, and M. Widmann, 2017: A combined statistical bias correction and stochastic downscaling method for precipitation. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 21 (3), 1693--1719

    work page 2017

  46. [46]

    Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 22 (6), 3175

    Vrac, M., 2018: Multivariate bias adjustment of high-dimensional climate simulations: the Rank Resampling for Distributions and Dependences (R 2 D 2) bias correction. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 22 (6), 3175

    work page 2018

  47. [47]

    Drobinski, A

    Vrac, M., P. Drobinski, A. Merlo, M. Herrmann, C. Lavaysse, L. Li, and S. Somot, 2012: Dynamical and statistical downscaling of the French Mediterranean climate: Uncertainty assessment. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 12 (9), 2769--2784

    work page 2012

  48. [48]

    Friederichs, 2015: Multivariate—intervariable, spatial, and temporal—bias correction

    Vrac, M., and P. Friederichs, 2015: Multivariate—intervariable, spatial, and temporal—bias correction. Journal of Climate, 28 (1), 218--237

    work page 2015

  49. [49]

    F., 2014: The two-piece normal, binormal, or double G aussian distribution: its origin and rediscoveries

    Wallis, K. F., 2014: The two-piece normal, binormal, or double G aussian distribution: its origin and rediscoveries. Statistical Science, 106--112

    work page 2014

  50. [50]

    S., 1999: Multisite downscaling of daily precipitation with a stochastic weather generator

    Wilks, D. S., 1999: Multisite downscaling of daily precipitation with a stochastic weather generator. Climate Research, 11 (2), 125--136

    work page 1999

  51. [51]

    S., 2009: A gridded multisite weather generator and synchronization to observed weather data

    Wilks, D. S., 2009: A gridded multisite weather generator and synchronization to observed weather data. Water resources research, 45 (10)

    work page 2009

  52. [52]

    S., 2010: Use of stochastic weathergenerators for precipitation downscaling

    Wilks, D. S., 2010: Use of stochastic weathergenerators for precipitation downscaling. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 1 (6), 898--907

    work page 2010

  53. [53]

    S., 2012: Stochastic weather generators for climate-change downscaling, part II : multivariable and spatially coherent multisite downscaling

    Wilks, D. S., 2012: Stochastic weather generators for climate-change downscaling, part II : multivariable and spatially coherent multisite downscaling. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 3 (3), 267--278

    work page 2012

  54. [54]

    Maraun, M

    Wong, G., D. Maraun, M. Vrac, M. Widmann, J. M. Eden, and T. Kent, 2014: Stochastic model output statistics for bias correcting and downscaling precipitation including extremes. Journal of Climate, 27 (18), 6940--6959

    work page 2014

  55. [55]

    Wood, A. W., L. R. Leung, V. Sridhar, and D. Lettenmaier, 2004: Hydrologic implications of dynamical and statistical approaches to downscaling climate model outputs. Climatic change, 62 (1-3), 189--216

    work page 2004

  56. [56]

    Water Resources Management, 13 (5), 369--382

    Xu, C.-y., 1999: Climate change and hydrologic models: A review of existing gaps and recent research developments. Water Resources Management, 13 (5), 369--382

    work page 1999