the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
High resolution downscaling of CMIP6 Earth System and Global Climate Models using deep learning for Iberia
Pedro M. M. Soares
Daniela C. A. Lima
Gil Lemos
Virgílio Bento
Angelina Bushenkova
Abstract. Deep learning (DL) methods have recently garnered attention from the climate change community, as an innovative approach for downscaling climate variables from Earth System and Global Climate Models (ESGCMs) with horizontal resolutions still too coarse to represent regional-to-local-scale phenomena. In the context of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 6 (CMIP6), ESGCMs simulations were conducted for the Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), at resolutions ranging from 0.70º to 3.75º. Here, four Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) architectures were evaluated for their ability to downscale, to a resolution of 0.1º, seven CMIP6 ESGCMs over the Iberian Peninsula - a known climate change hotspot, due to its increased vulnerability to projected future warming and drying conditions. The study is divided into three stages: (1) evaluating the performance of the four CNN architectures in predicting mean, minimum, and maximum temperatures, as well as daily precipitation, trained using ERA5 data, and compared with the Iberia01 observational dataset; (2) downscaling the CMIP6 ESGCMs using the trained CNN architectures and further evaluating the ensemble against Iberia01; and (3) constructing a multi-model ensemble of CNN-based downscaled projections for temperature and precipitation over the Iberian Peninsula at 0.1º resolution throughout the 21st century, under four Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP) scenarios. Upon validation and satisfactory performance evaluation, the DL downscaled projections demonstrate overall agreement with the CMIP6 ESGCM ensemble in terms of temperature and precipitation projections. Moreover, the advantages of using a high-resolution DL downscaled ensemble of ESGCM climate projections are evident, offering substantial added value in representing regional climate change over Iberia. Notably, a clear warming trend is observed, consistent with previous studies in this area, with projected temperature increases ranging from 2 ºC to 6 ºC depending on the climate scenario. Regarding precipitation, robust projected decreases are observed in western and southwestern Iberia, particularly after 2040. These results may offer a new tool for providing regional climate change information for adaptation strategies based on CMIP6 ESGCMs prior to the next phase of the European branch from the Coordinated Regional Climate Downscaling Experiment (EURO-CORDEX) experiments.
- Preprint
(2791 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Pedro M. M. Soares et al.
Status: open (extended)
-
CEC1: 'Comment on gmd-2023-136', Juan Antonio Añel, 31 Jul 2023
reply
Dear authors,
Unfortunately, after checking your manuscript, it has come to our attention that it does not comply with our "Code and Data Policy".https://www.geoscientific-model-development.net/policies/code_and_data_policy.htmlFirst, in the code availability section you state "The DL configuration is available upon request". This is entirely unacceptable, and it is clear in our policy. We can not accept that the assets of a paper are only available "upon request". They must be published together with the manuscript at the submission time. Also, you must publish the exact input data used to train your algorithms and the output data in one of the suitable repositories (check our policy).Given this lack of compliance with our policy, I note that your manuscript should not have been accepted in Discussions. Therefore, the current situation with your manuscript is irregular. You must promptly fix this problem; otherwise, we will have to reject your manuscript for publication in our journal.Therefore, please, reply to this comment (as soon as possible) with the relevant information (link and DOI) for the new repositories, including in them "free-open source" and "open access" licenses.Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive EditorCitation: https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2023-136-CEC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on CEC1', Frederico Johannsen, 07 Aug 2023
reply
Hello,
We are gathering the data to be published in a repository. But since the size of the dataset is very large (above 500 GB), this will be a very slow process. Once we have it ready we'll link it here.Frederico Johannsen
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2023-136-AC1 -
AC2: 'Reply on CEC1', Frederico Johannsen, 14 Sep 2023
reply
Hello,
Below we include the links and DOIs of the input/output data of our study published in Zenodo. We apologize for the long time taken to gather and publish the data.
Part 1: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8314980 / https://zenodo.org/record/8314980
Part 2: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8338468 / https://zenodo.org/record/8338468
Part 3: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8340234 / https://zenodo.org/record/8340234
Part 4: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8340250 / https://zenodo.org/record/8340250
Part 5: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8340266 / https://zenodo.org/record/8340266
Part 6: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8340274 / https://zenodo.org/record/8340274
Part 7: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8340279 / https://zenodo.org/record/8340279
Part 8: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8340287 / https://zenodo.org/record/8340287
Part 9: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8340297 / https://zenodo.org/record/8340297
Part 10: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8340318 / https://zenodo.org/record/8340318
Part 11: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8340338 / https://zenodo.org/record/8340338
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2023-136-AC2
-
AC1: 'Reply on CEC1', Frederico Johannsen, 07 Aug 2023
reply
-
RC1: 'Comment on gmd-2023-136', Anonymous Referee #1, 08 Sep 2023
reply
In this manuscript, deep learning methodology based on CNN architectures is evaluated for downscaling CMIP6 simulations and projection with standard resolutions to a higher resolution, i.e. 1/10th deg. The analysis focuses on the Iberian Peninsula, and the ability of four CNN architectures to reproduce the surface T, Tmin, Tmax and Pr climates is evaluated. The DL algorithm is trained using ERA5 and compared to the high-resolution regular gridded dataset over the historical period, and then used to downscale future projections (relative to historical climate) in agreement with four future scenarios and multi-models.
Overall, the manuscript is well organized in format and the writing is clear. Although the physical process is rarely touched (due to the limitation of DL), the downscaled results based on DL are sound. I have some comments regarding clarifications in the main text.
Line 23: “Notably, …. climate scenario”. Please specify the region (Iberia) exhibiting the temperature increase.
Line 129: I am not familiar with any paper using “democratic” to describe a simple average. It would be better to just use “simple average”, which is straightforward and easy to follow. I noticed that “democratic” has been mentioned several times in this manuscript. Please also revise those instances accordingly.
Line 145 (Fig. 1) Can you mention why this domain of predictors is chosen (dashed line)? Have you tested the sensitivity of the downscaled fields when the domain of predicators is changed?
Lines 170-173: These sentences would be better placed in the introduction.
Table 1: It would be better to provide the full name of CMIP6 ESGCM. For example, CM6A-LR -> IPSL-CM6A-LR.
Lines 220-222: I am not able to follow this sentence. Could you rephrase it?
Lines 222-223: How are these terms (alphas, beta, and distribution) used in this study? I couldn’t find more discussions about these terms from CMIP6 runs.
Line 238: How were the missing data filled? Were they filled with zeros?
Line 276: How about changing “members” to “models”, as the members are also used to describe 4 DL architectures (Line 384)? Similarly, in Line 48, 7 members -> 7 models.
Line 283: Why was the base period chosen as 1981-2010 and not 1979-2014? The projected temperature increase depends on the reference period, which should be mentioned clearly in the corresponding section.
Fig. 2 and subsequent figures: I am not sure how the error bar of each boxplot is calculated. Is it related to the uncertainty of parameters in the DL model?
The error bar in Fig. 10 and the following figures seem to have different meanings compared with the previous figures, I guess. Are these related to the spread from 4 CNN methods and 7 models?
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2023-136-RC1 -
AC3: 'Reply on RC1', Frederico Johannsen, 15 Sep 2023
reply
Our response to the comments of the Anonymous Referee #1 are available in the PDF file attached as supplement.
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC1', Frederico Johannsen, 15 Sep 2023
reply
Pedro M. M. Soares et al.
Pedro M. M. Soares et al.
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
376 | 161 | 17 | 554 | 6 | 4 |
- HTML: 376
- PDF: 161
- XML: 17
- Total: 554
- BibTeX: 6
- EndNote: 4
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1