Bias correction of surface downwelling longwave and shortwave radiation for the EWEMBI dataset

• Published in: Earth system dynamics 2018-05, Vol.9 (2), p.627-645
• Main Author: Lange, Stefan
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Analysis; Atmospheric forcing; Bias; Bias (Statistics); Corrections; Data; Downwelling; Forecasts and trends; Interpolation; Mapping; Meteorological satellites; Numerical weather prediction; Radiation; Radiation budget; Resolution; Sampling error; Scaling; Short wave radiation; Solar radiation; Spatial discrimination; Spatial resolution; Spatial variability; Spatial variations; Statistical methods; Time; Variability
• ISSN: 2190-4987; 2190-4979; 2190-4987
• DOI: 10.5194/esd-9-627-2018

Many meteorological forcing datasets include bias-corrected surface downwelling longwave and shortwave radiation (rlds and rsds). Methods used for such bias corrections range from multi-year monthly mean value scaling to quantile mapping at the daily timescale. An additional downscaling is necessary if the data to be corrected have a higher spatial resolution than the observational data used to determine the biases. This was the case when EartH2Observe (Calton et al., 2016) rlds and rsds were bias-corrected using more coarsely resolved Surface Radiation Budget (Stackhouse Jr. et al., 2011) data for the production of the meteorological forcing dataset EWEMBI (Lange, 2016). This article systematically compares various parametric quantile mapping methods designed specifically for this purpose, including those used for the production of EWEMBI rlds and rsds. The methods vary in the timescale at which they operate, in their way of accounting for physical upper radiation limits, and in their approach to bridging the spatial resolution gap between E2OBS and SRB. It is shown how temporal and spatial variability deflation related to bilinear interpolation and other deterministic downscaling approaches can be overcome by downscaling the target statistics of quantile mapping from the SRB to the E2OBS grid such that the sub-SRB-grid-scale spatial variability present in the original E2OBS data is retained. Cross validations at the daily and monthly timescales reveal that it is worthwhile to take empirical estimates of physical upper limits into account when adjusting either radiation component and that, overall, bias correction at the daily timescale is more effective than bias correction at the monthly timescale if sampling errors are taken into account.