Validation of global precipitation time series products against tree ring records and remotely sensed vegetation greenness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Global interpolated climate products are widely used in ecological research to investigate biosphere-climate interactions and to track ecological response to climate variability and climate change. In turn, biological data could also be used for an independent validation of one aspect of climate data quality. All else being equal, more variance explained in biological data identifies the better climate data product. Here, we compare seven global precipitation time series products, including gauge-based datasets (CRU-TS, UDEL-TS, GPCC), re-analysis products (ERA5, CHELSA), a satellite-based dataset (PERSIANN) and a multi-source product that draws on gauge, re-analysis, and satellite data (MSWEP). We focus on precipitation variables, because they are more difficult to interpolate than temperature, and show larger divergence among gridded data products. Our validation is based on 20 years of remotely sensed vegetation greenness (MODIS-EVI) and 120 years of tree ring records from the International Tree Ring Data Bank (ITRDB). The results for the 20-year EVI based validation shows that all gauge and re-analysis data products performed similarly, but were outperformed by the multi-source MSWEP product, especially in regions with low weather station coverage, such as Africa. For analyzing long 120-year time-series, UDEL-TS showed superior performance prior to the 1940s, with especially large margins for northern Asia and the Himalayas region. For other regions, CRU-TS and GPCC could be recommended. We provide maps that can guide the best regional choice of climate product for research involving time series of biological response to historic climate variability and climate change.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".