• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

RealClimate

Climate science from climate scientists...

  • Start here
  • Model-Observation Comparisons
  • Miscellaneous Climate Graphics
  • Surface temperature graphics
You are here: Home / 2020 / Archives for November 2020

Archives for November 2020

Thinking, small and big

29 Nov 2020 by rasmus

The point that climate downscaling must pay attention to the law of small numbers is no joke.

The World Climate Research Programme (WCRP) will become a ‘new’ WCRP with a “soft launch” in 2021. This is quite a big story since it coordinates much of the research and the substance on which the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) builds.  

 

Until now, the COordinated Regional Downscaling EXperiment (CORDEX) has been a major project sponsored by the WRCP. CORDEX has involved regional modelling and downscaling with a focus on the models and methods rather than providing climate services. In its new form, the activities that used to be carried out within CORDEX will belong to the WCRP community called ‘Regional information for society’ (RifS). This implies a slight shift in emphasis.

 

With this change, the WCRP signals a desire for the regional modelling results to become more useful and relevant for decision-makers. The change will also introduce a set of new requirements, and hence the law of small numbers.

 

The law of small numbers is described in Daniel Kahneman’s book ‘Thinking, fast and slow‘ and is a condition that can be explained by statistical theory. It says that you are likely to draw a misleading conclusion if your sample is small.  

 

I’m no statistician, but a physicist who experienced a “statistical revelation” about a decade ago. Physics-based disciplines, such as meteorology, often approach a problem from a different angle to the statisticians, and there are often some gaps in the understanding and appreciation between the two communities.

 

A physicist would say that if we know one side of an equation, then we also know the other side. The statistician, on the other hand, would use data to prove there is an equation in the first place.

 

One of the key pillars of statistics is that we have a random sample that represents what we want to study. We have no such statistical samples for future climate outlooks, but we do have ensembles of simulations representing future projections.

 

We also have to keep in mind that regional climate behaves differently to global climate. There are pronounced stochastic variations on regional and decadal scales that may swamp the long-term trends due to greenhouse gases (Deser et al., 2012). These variations are subdued on a global scale since opposite variations over different regions tend to cancel each other.

 

CORDEX has in the past produced ensembles that can be considered as small, and Mezghani et al., (2019) demonstrated that the Euro-CORDEX ensemble is affected by the law of small numbers.

Even if you have a perfect global climate model and perfect downscaling, you risk getting misleading results with a small ensemble, thanks to the law of small numbers. The regional variations are non-deterministic due to the chaotic nature of the atmospheric circulation.

 

My take-home-message is that there is a need for sufficiently large ensembles of downscaled results. Furthermore, it is the number of different simulations with global climate models that is key since they provide boundary conditions for the downscaling.

 

Hence, there is a need for a strong and continued coordination between the downscaling groups so that more scientists contribute to building such ensembles.

 

Also, while CORDEX has been strong on regional climate modelling, the new RifS community needs additional new expertise. Perhaps a stronger presence of statisticians is a good thing. And while the downscaled results from large ensembles can provide a basis for a risk analysis, there is also another way to provide regional information for society: stress-testing.

References

  1. C. Deser, R. Knutti, S. Solomon, and A.S. Phillips, "Communication of the role of natural variability in future North American climate", Nature Climate Change, vol. 2, pp. 775-779, 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1562
  2. A. Mezghani, A. Dobler, R. Benestad, J.E. Haugen, K.M. Parding, M. Piniewski, and Z.W. Kundzewicz, "Subsampling Impact on the Climate Change Signal over Poland Based on Simulations from Statistical and Dynamical Downscaling", Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology, vol. 58, pp. 1061-1078, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/JAMC-D-18-0179.1

Filed Under: Climate Science

Unforced Variations: Nov 2020

2 Nov 2020 by group

This month’s open thread for climate science. As if there wasn’t enough going on, we have still more hurricanes in the Atlantic, temperature records tumbling despite La Niña, Arctic sea ice that doesn’t want to reform, bushfire season kicking off in the Southern Hemisphere while we are barely done with it in the North…

Welcome to the new normal, folks.

Filed Under: Climate Science, Open thread

Primary Sidebar

Search

Search for:

Email Notification

get new posts sent to you automatically (free)
Loading

Recent Posts

  • EPA’s final* ruling on CO2
  • The Climate Science reference they don’t want Judges to read
  • Koonin’s Continuing Calumnies
  • Unforced variations: Feb 2026
  • 2025 Updates
  • A peek behind the curtain…

Our Books

Book covers
This list of books since 2005 (in reverse chronological order) that we have been involved in, accompanied by the publisher’s official description, and some comments of independent reviewers of the work.
All Books >>

Recent Comments

  • Data on EPA’s final* ruling on CO2
  • Data on EPA’s final* ruling on CO2
  • Data on Unforced variations: Feb 2026
  • Data on EPA’s final* ruling on CO2
  • Data on EPA’s final* ruling on CO2
  • Data on EPA’s final* ruling on CO2
  • Nigelj on EPA’s final* ruling on CO2
  • Tom Fuller on EPA’s final* ruling on CO2
  • Ray Ladbury on Unforced variations: Feb 2026
  • Ray Ladbury on The Climate Science reference they don’t want Judges to read
  • Ron R. on The Climate Science reference they don’t want Judges to read
  • Ray Ladbury on EPA’s final* ruling on CO2
  • Susan Anderson on EPA’s final* ruling on CO2
  • Susan Anderson on EPA’s final* ruling on CO2
  • Susan Anderson on The Climate Science reference they don’t want Judges to read
  • Tomáš Kalisz on 2025 Updates
  • Ron R. on The Climate Science reference they don’t want Judges to read
  • Barton Paul Levenson on The Climate Science reference they don’t want Judges to read
  • Thomas W Fuller on EPA’s final* ruling on CO2
  • Data on Unforced variations: Feb 2026
  • Data on EPA’s final* ruling on CO2
  • Martin Smith on EPA’s final* ruling on CO2
  • Joseph O'Sullivan on EPA’s final* ruling on CO2
  • Nigelj on The Climate Science reference they don’t want Judges to read
  • Piotr on 2025 Updates
  • Joseph O'Sullivan on EPA’s final* ruling on CO2
  • Nigelj on Unforced variations: Feb 2026
  • Tomáš Kalisz on EPA’s final* ruling on CO2
  • patrick o twentyseven on The Climate Science reference they don’t want Judges to read
  • Secular Animist on EPA’s final* ruling on CO2

Footer

ABOUT

  • About
  • Translations
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact Page
  • Login

DATA AND GRAPHICS

  • Data Sources
  • Model-Observation Comparisons
  • Surface temperature graphics
  • Miscellaneous Climate Graphics

INDEX

  • Acronym index
  • Index
  • Archives
  • Contributors

Realclimate Stats

1,398 posts

15 pages

250,408 comments

Copyright © 2026 · RealClimate is a commentary site on climate science by working climate scientists for the interested public and journalists.