An evaluation of daily precipitation from a regional atmospheric reanalysis over Australia
An accurate representation of spatio-temporal characteristics of precipitation fields is fundamental for many hydro-meteorological analyses but is often limited by the paucity of gauges. Reanalysis models provide systematic methods of representing atmospheric processes to produce datasets of spatio-...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Hydrology and earth system sciences 2019-08, Vol.23 (8), p.3387-3403 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | An accurate representation of spatio-temporal characteristics of
precipitation fields is fundamental for many hydro-meteorological analyses
but is often limited by the paucity of gauges. Reanalysis models provide
systematic methods of representing atmospheric processes to produce datasets
of spatio-temporal precipitation estimates. The precipitation from the
reanalysis datasets should, however, be evaluated thoroughly before use
because it is inferred from physical parameterization. In this paper, we
evaluated the precipitation dataset from the Bureau of Meteorology
Atmospheric high-resolution Regional Reanalysis for Australia (BARRA) and
compared it against (a) gauged point observations, (b) an interpolated
gridded dataset based on gauged point observations (AWAP – Australian Water Availability Project), and (c) a global
reanalysis dataset (ERA-Interim). We utilized a range of evaluation metrics
such as continuous metrics (correlation, bias, variability, and modified
Kling–Gupta efficiency), categorical metrics, and other statistics (wet-day
frequency, transition probabilities, and quantiles) to ascertain the quality
of the dataset. BARRA, in comparison with ERA-Interim, shows a better
representation of rainfall of larger magnitude at both the point and grid scale
of 5 km. BARRA also more closely reproduces the distribution of wet days and
transition probabilities. The performance of BARRA varies spatially, with
better performance in the temperate zone than in the arid and tropical
zones. A point-to-grid evaluation based on correlation, bias, and modified
Kling–Gupta efficiency (KGE′) indicates that ERA-Interim performs on par or
better than BARRA. However, on a spatial scale, BARRA outperforms
ERA-Interim in terms of the KGE′ score and the components of the KGE′ score. Our
evaluation illustrates that BARRA, with richer spatial variations in
climatology of daily precipitation, provides an improved representation of
precipitation compared with the coarser ERA-Interim. It is a useful
complement to existing precipitation datasets for Australia, especially in
sparsely gauged regions. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1607-7938 1027-5606 1607-7938 |
DOI: | 10.5194/hess-23-3387-2019 |