气候水文预估不确定性量化及约束方法研究进展

doi:10.12006/j.issn.1673-1719.2024.276

气候变化研究进展 ›› 2025, Vol. 21 ›› Issue (3): 317-326.doi: 10.12006/j.issn.1673-1719.2024.276

气候水文预估不确定性量化及约束方法研究进展

张琴¹^,²^,³(), 张利平²(), 李意⁴, 刘丽娜², 佘敦先², 周芷菱², 袁喆¹^,³

1.长江水利委员会长江科学院，武汉 430010
2.武汉大学水资源工程与调度全国重点实验室，武汉 430072
3.流域水资源与生态环境科学湖北省重点实验室，武汉 430010
4.中国电建集团贵阳勘测设计研究院有限公司，贵阳 550081

收稿日期:2024-10-25 修回日期:2024-12-19 出版日期:2025-05-30 发布日期:2025-04-18
通讯作者: 张利平，男，教授，zhanglp@whu.edu.cn
作者简介:张琴，男，工程师，zhangqinwhu@whu.edu.cn
基金资助:
中央级公益性科研院所基本科研业务费项目(CKSF2024989/SZ);国家自然科学基金项目(52279023);武汉市自然科学基金特区计划项目(2024040701010035);工程二三维GIS勘测设计系统关键技术研究(KY94200004)

Research progress on uncertainty quantification and constraint methods for climate and hydrological projections

ZHANG Qin¹^,²^,³(), ZHANG Li-Ping²(), LI Yi⁴, LIU Li-Na², SHE Dun-Xian², ZHOU Zhi-Ling², YUAN Zhe¹^,³

1. Changjiang River Scientific Research Institute, Changjiang Water Resources Commission, Wuhan 430010, China
2. State Key Laboratory of Water Resources Engineering and Management, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China
3. Hubei Key Laboratory of Water Resources & Eco-Environment Science, Wuhan 430010, China
4. Guiyang Engineering Co., Ltd., China Electric Power Construction Group, Guiyang 550081, China

Received:2024-10-25 Revised:2024-12-19 Online:2025-05-30 Published:2025-04-18

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

准确量化并减小气候水文预估的不确定性是后续气候变化影响评估和适应性策略制定的前提。针对预估不确定性的分离量化，系统回顾了不同方法的发展历程，陈述了方法的实现过程和适用情况，包括HS09法、L20法和方差分析法。进一步阐明了减小模式不确定性的必要性和思路，将约束预估方法分为4类：检测归因约束、加权约束、涌现约束和校正约束，全面介绍了各个方法的原理，从关系的建立、适用尺度、应用变量等多方面分析了约束方法的特性和优缺点，随后总结了不同约束方法的检验及结果评估的实现流程。最后展望了该领域亟需关注的重点内容和未来可能的发展趋势，以期为提高气候水文变量或极端事件预估的准确性和可靠性提供参考。

关键词: 气候变化, 气候模式, 预估不确定性, 约束预估, 涌现约束, 完美模型检验

Abstract:

Accurately quantifying and reducing the uncertainty of climate and hydrological projections is a prerequisite for subsequent climate change impact assessment and adaptation strategy development. For the quantification of projection uncertainty, the development history of different methods is systematically reviewed, and the realization process and applicability of methods, including the HS09, the L20, and the analysis of variance are stated. Further the necessity and ideas to reduce the model uncertainty are elucidated, and the constraint projection methods are classified into four categories: detecting attribution constraints, weighting constraints, emergent constraints, and correction constraints. The principle of each method are comprehensively introduced, and the characteristics of the constraint methods in terms of the establishment of the relationship, the applicability of the scales and variables, are analyzed. Then the implementation process of testing different constraint methods and evaluating the results are summarized. Finally, the key points that need urgent attention in this field are discussed, and the possible future trends are prospected, with a view to providing reference for improving the accuracy and reliability of climate and hydrological variables projections.

Key words: Climate change, Climate model, Uncertainty of projection, Constraint projection, Emergent constraint, Perfect Model Test

张琴, 张利平, 李意, 刘丽娜, 佘敦先, 周芷菱, 袁喆. 气候水文预估不确定性量化及约束方法研究进展[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2025, 21(3): 317-326.

ZHANG Qin, ZHANG Li-Ping, LI Yi, LIU Li-Na, SHE Dun-Xian, ZHOU Zhi-Ling, YUAN Zhe. Research progress on uncertainty quantification and constraint methods for climate and hydrological projections[J]. Climate Change Research, 2025, 21(3): 317-326.

图/表 3

表1 预估不确定性量化方法比较

Table 1 Comparisons of uncertainty quantification methods for projection

表2 约束预估方法比较

Table 2 Comparisons of constraint projection methods

图1 涌现约束示意图

Fig. 1 Schematic diagram of emergent constraint

参考文献 74

[1]	Tebaldi C, Debeire K, Eyring V, et al. Climate model projections from the scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) of CMIP 6 [J]. Earth System Dynamics, 2021, 12 (1): 253-293
[2]	周佰铨, 翟盘茂. IPCC第六次气候变化评估中的气候约束预估方法[J]. 气象学报, 2021, 79 (6): 1063-1070.
	Zhou B Q, Zhai P M. The constraint methods for projection in the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report on climate change[J]. Acta Meteorologica Sinica, 2021, 79 (6): 1063-1070 (in Chinese)
[3]	IPCC. Climate change 2021: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the sixth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change [M]. Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press, 2021
[4]	Hawkins E, Sutton R. The potential to narrow uncertainty in regional climate predictions[J]. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 2009, 90 (8): 1095-1108
[5]	Lehner F, Deser C, Maher N, et al. Partitioning climate projection uncertainty with multiple large ensembles and CMIP5/6[J]. Earth System Dynamics, 2020, 11 (2): 491-508
[6]	周天军, 陈梓明, 陈晓龙, 等. IPCC AR6 报告解读: 未来的全球气候 —— 基于情景的预估和近期信息[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2021, 17 (6): 652-663.
	Zhou T J, Chen Z M, Chen X L, et al. Interpreting IPCC AR6: future global climate based on projection under scenarios and on near-term information[J]. Climate Change Research, 2021, 17 (6): 652-663 (in Chinese)
[7]	Hall A, Cox P, Huntingford C, et al. Progressing emergent constraints on future climate change[J]. Nature Climate Change, 2019, 9 (4): 269-278 doi: 10.1038/s41558-019-0436-6
[8]	Liang Y, Gillett N P, Monahan A H. Climate model projections of 21st century global warming constrained using the observed warming trend[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2020, 47 (12): 1-10
[9]	Ribes A, Qasmi S, Gillett N P. Making climate projections conditional on historical observations[J]. Science Advances, 2021, 7 (4): 1-10
[10]	Kettleborough J A, Booth B B B, Stott P A, et al. Estimates of uncertainty in predictions of global mean surface temperature[J]. Journal of Climate, 2007, 20 (5): 843-855
[11]	Hawkins E, Sutton R. The potential to narrow uncertainty in projections of regional precipitation change[J]. Climate Dynamics, 2011, 37 (1-2): 407-418
[12]	Wu Y, Miao C, Slater L, et al. Hydrological projections under CMIP5 and CMIP6: sources and magnitudes of uncertainty[J]. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 2024, 105 (1): E59-E74
[13]	Zhang S, Chen J. Uncertainty in projection of climate extremes: a comparison of CMIP5 and CMIP6[J]. Journal of Meteorological Research, 2021, 35 (4): 646-662
[14]	Deser C, Lehner F, Rodgers K B, et al. Insights from Earth system model initial-condition large ensembles and future prospects[J]. Nature Climate Change, 2020, 10 (4): 277-286
[15]	Ji Y, Fu J, Liu B, et al. Uncertainty separation of drought projection in the 21st century using SMILEs and CMIP6[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2024, 628: 130497
[16]	Schwarzwald K, Lenssen N. The importance of internal climate variability in climate impact projections[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2022, 119 (42): e2208095119
[17]	Yip S, Ferro C A T, Stephenson D B, et al. A simple, coherent framework for partitioning uncertainty in climate predictions[J]. Journal of Climate, 2011, 24 (17): 4634-4643
[18]	Zhang S, Zhou Z, Peng P, et al. A new framework for estimating and decomposing the uncertainty of climate projections[J]. Journal of Climate, 2023, 37 (2): 365-384
[19]	Bosshard T, Carambia M, Goergen K, et al. Quantifying uncertainty sources in an ensemble of hydrological climate-impact projections[J]. Water Resources Research, 2013, 49 (3): 1523-1536
[20]	Giuntoli I, Vidal J P, Prudhomme C, et al. Future hydrological extremes: the uncertainty from multiple global climate and global hydrological models[J]. Earth System Dynamics, 2015, 6 (1): 267-285
[21]	Zhou T, Lu J, Zhang W, et al. The sources of uncertainty in the projection of global land monsoon precipitation[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2020, 47 (15): e2020GL088415
[22]	Jain S, Scaife A A, Shepherd T G, et al. Importance of internal variability for climate model assessment[J]. NPJ Climate and Atmospheric Science, 2023, 6 (1): 1-7
[23]	Bevacqua E, Suarez-Gutierrez L, Jézéquel A, et al. Advancing research on compound weather and climate events via large ensemble model simulations[J]. Nature Communications, 2023, 14 (1): 2145 doi: 10.1038/s41467-023-37847-5 pmid: 37059735
[24]	Wu Y T, Liang Y C, Kuo Y N, et al. Exploiting SMILEs and the CMIP5 archive to understand arctic climate change seasonality and uncertainty[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2023, 50 (2): e2022GL100745
[25]	Karpechko A Yu, Afargan-Gerstman H, Butler A H, et al. Northern hemisphere stratosphere-troposphere circulation change in CMIP6 models: 1. Inter-model spread and scenario sensitivity[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 2022, 127 (18): e2022JD036992
[26]	Brunner L, Pendergrass A G, Lehner F, et al. Reduced global warming from CMIP6 projections when weighting models by performance and independence[J]. Earth System Dynamics, 2020, 11 (4): 995-1012
[27]	Williamson D B, Sansom P P G. How are emergent constraints quantifying uncertainty and what do they leave behind?[J]. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 2019, 100 (12): 2571-2587 doi: 10.1175/BAMS-D-19-0131.1
[28]	赵宗慈, 罗勇, 黄建斌. 对地球系统模式评估方法的回顾[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2013, 9 (1): 1-8.
	Zhao Z C, Luo Y, Huang J B. A review on evaluation methods of climate modeling[J]. Climate Change Research, 2013, 9 (1): 1-8 (in Chinese)
[29]	周天仪, 江志红, 李伟, 等. 不同物理约束方案下西北地区夏季降水的未来预估对比[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2024, 20 (4): 403-415.
	Zhou T Y, Jiang Z H, Li W, et al. A comparative study of future summer precipitation projections in Northwest China under different physical constraint schemes[J]. Climate Change Research, 2024, 20 (4): 403-415 (in Chinese)
[30]	Brunner L, McSweeney C, Ballinger A P, et al. Comparing methods to constrain future european climate projections using a consistent framework[J]. Journal of Climate, 2020, 33 (20): 8671-8692 doi: 10.1175/JCLI-D-19-0953.1
[31]	Hegerl G C, Ballinger A P, Booth B B B, et al. Toward consistent observational constraints in climate predictions and projections[J]. Frontiers in Climate, 2021, 3 (6): 1-22
[32]	Gillett N P, Kirchmeier-Young M, Ribes A, et al. Constraining human contributions to observed warming since the pre-industrial period[J]. Nature Climate Change, 2021, 11 (3): 207-212
[33]	Xu H, Chen H, Wang H. Detectable human influence on changes in precipitation extremes across China[J]. Earth’s Future, 2022, 10 (2): e2021EF002409
[34]	Sanderson B M, Wehner M, Knutti R. Skill and independence weighting for multi-model assessments[J]. Geoscientific Model Development, 2017, 10 (6): 2379-2395
[35]	Zhao J, He S, Wang H. Historical and future runoff changes in the Yangtze River basin from CMIP6 models constrained by a weighting strategy[J]. Environmental Research Letters, 2022, 17 (2): 24015
[36]	Pokhrel Y, Felfelani F, Satoh Y, et al. Global terrestrial water storage and drought severity under climate change[J]. Nature Climate Change, 2021, 11 (3): 226-233
[37]	Williamson M S, Thackeray C W, Cox P M, et al. Emergent constraints on climate sensitivities[J]. Reviews of Modern Physics, 2021, 93 (2): 25004
[38]	Tokarska K B, Stolpe M B, Sippel S, et al. Past warming trend constrains future warming in CMIP6 models[J]. Science Advances, 2020, 6 (12): 1-14
[39]	Shiogama H, Watanabe M, Kim H, et al. Emergent constraints on future precipitation changes[J]. Nature, 2022, 602 (7898): 612
[40]	Thackeray C W, Hall A, Norris J, et al. Constraining the increased frequency of global precipitation extremes under warming[J]. Nature Climate Change, 2022, 12 (5): 441-448
[41]	Wu Y, Miao C, Fan X, et al. Quantifying the uncertainty sources of future climate projections and narrowing uncertainties with bias correction techniques[J]. Earth’s Future, 2022, 10 (11): e2022EF002963
[42]	Zhou S, Huang G, Huang P. A bias-corrected projection for the changes in east asian summer monsoon rainfall under global warming[J]. Climate Dynamics, 2020, 54 (1): 1-16
[43]	Yu H, Zhang Q, Wei Y, et al. Bias-corrections on aridity index simulations of climate models by observational constraints[J]. International Journal of Climatology, 2022, 42 (2): 889-907
[44]	Allen M R, Stott P A, Mitchell J F B, et al. Quantifying the uncertainty in forecasts of anthropogenic climate change[J]. Nature, 2000, 407 (6804): 617-620
[45]	Stott P A, Kettleborough J A. Origins and estimates of uncertainty in predictions of twenty-first century temperature rise[J]. Nature, 2002, 416 (6882): 723-726
[46]	Hasselmann K. Multi-pattern fingerprint method for detection and attribution of climate change[J]. Climate Dynamics, 1997, 13 (9): 601-611
[47]	Tokarska K B, Hegerl G C, Schurer A P, et al. Quantifying human contributions to past and future ocean warming and thermosteric sea level rise[J]. Environmental Research Letters, 2019, 14 (7): 74020
[48]	钱诚, 张文霞. CMIP6检测归因模式比较计划(DAMIP)概况与评述[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2019, 15 (5): 469-475.
	Qian C, Zhang W X. Short commentary on CMIP6 Detection and Attribution Model Intercomparison Project (DAMIP)[J]. Climate Change Research, 2019, 15 (5): 469-475 (in Chinese)
[49]	Gillett N P, Shiogama H, Funke B, et al. The detection and attribution model intercomparison project (DAMIP v1.0) contribution to CMIP6[J]. Geoscientific Model Development, 2016, 9 (10): 3685-3697
[50]	Knutti R, Sedlá?ek J, Sanderson B M, et al. A climate model projection weighting scheme accounting for performance and interdependence[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2017, 44 (4): 1909-1918
[51]	Abramowitz G, Herger N, Gutmann E, et al. ESD reviews: model dependence in multi-model climate ensembles: weighting, sub-selection and out-of-sample testing[J]. Earth System Dynamics, 2019, 10 (1): 91-105 doi: 10.5194/esd-10-91-2019
[52]	Leduc M, Laprise R, de Elía R, et al. Is institutional democracy a good proxy for model independence?[J]. Journal of Climate, 2016, 29 (23): 8301-8316
[53]	Boé J. Interdependency in multimodel climate projections: component replication and result similarity[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2018, 45 (6): 2771-2779
[54]	Li T, Zhang X, Jiang Z. What aspect of model performance is the most relevant to skillful future projection on a regional scale?[J]. Journal of Climate, 2024, 37 (5): 1567-1580
[55]	Hall A, Qu X. Using the current seasonal cycle to constrain snow albedo feedback in future climate change[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2006, 33 (3)
[56]	Cox P M, Huntingford C, Williamson M S. Emergent constraint on equilibrium climate sensitivity from global temperature variability[J]. Nature, 2018, 553 (7688): 319-322
[57]	Jiménez-de-la-Cuesta D, Mauritsen T. Emergent constraints on Earth’s transient and equilibrium response to doubled CO₂ from post-1970s global warming[J]. Nature Geoscience, 2019, 12 (11): 902-905
[58]	Nijsse F J M M, Dijkstra H A. A mathematical approach to understanding emergent constraints[J]. Earth System Dynamics, 2018, 9 (3): 999-1012
[59]	Sherwood S C, Webb M J, Annan J D, et al. An assessment of Earth’s climate sensitivity using multiple lines of evidence[J]. Reviews of Geophysics, 2020, 58 (4): 1-92
[60]	Bowman K W, Cressie N, Qu X, et al. A hierarchical statistical framework for emergent constraints: application to snow-albedo feedback[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2018, 45 (23): 1350-1359
[61]	Cannon A J, Sobie S R, Murdock T Q. Bias correction of GCM precipitation by quantile mapping: how well do methods preserve changes in quantiles and extremes?[J]. Journal of Climate, 2015, 28 (17): 6938-6959
[62]	Chen J, Arsenault R, Brissette F P, et al. Climate change impact studies: should we bias correct climate model outputs or post-process impact model outputs?[J]. Water Resources Research, 2021, 57 (5): 1-22
[63]	O’Reilly C H, Befort D J, Weisheimer A, et al. Projections of Northern Hemisphere extratropical climate underestimate internal variability and associated uncertainty[J]. Communications Earth & Environment, 2021, 2 (1): 1-9
[64]	Maraun D. Bias correcting climate change simulations: a critical review[J]. Current Climate Change Reports, 2016, 2 (4): 211-220
[65]	Chen J, Brissette F P, Leconte R. Uncertainty of downscaling method in quantifying the impact of climate change on hydrology[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2011, 401 (3-4): 190-202
[66]	Zhang Q, Gan Y, Zhang L, et al. Piecewise-quantile mapping improves bias correction of global climate model daily precipitation towards preserving quantiles and extremes[J]. International Journal of Climatology, 2022, 42 (15): 7968-7986
[67]	Chai Y, Yue Y, Slater L J, et al. Constrained CMIP6 projections indicate less warming and a slower increase in water availability across Asia[J]. Nature Communications, 2022, 13 (1): 4124 doi: 10.1038/s41467-022-31782-7 pmid: 35840591
[68]	Dai P, Nie J, Yu Y, et al. Constraints on regional projections of mean and extreme precipitation under warming[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2024, 121 (11): e2312400121
[69]	Sokol A B, Wall C J, Hartmann D L. Greater climate sensitivity implied by anvil cloud thinning[J]. Nature Geoscience, 2024: 1-6
[70]	McKim B, Bony S, Dufresne J L. Weak anvil cloud area feedback suggested by physical and observational constraints[J]. Nature Geoscience, 2024: 1-6
[71]	Bracco A, Brajard J, Dijkstra H A, et al. Machine learning for the physics of climate[J]. Nature Reviews Physics, 2024: 1-15
[72]	Eyring V, Collins W D, Gentine P, et al. Pushing the frontiers in climate modelling and analysis with machine learning[J]. Nature Climate Change, 2024: 1-13
[73]	Kochkov D, Yuval J, Langmore I, et al. Neural general circulation models for weather and climate[J]. Nature, 2024, 632 (8027): 1060-1066
[74]	Yu Y, Mao J, Wullschleger S D, et al. Machine learning: based observation-constrained projections reveal elevated global socioeconomic risks from wildfire[J]. Nature Communications, 2022, 13 (1): 1250

气候水文预估不确定性量化及约束方法研究进展

Research progress on uncertainty quantification and constraint methods for climate and hydrological projections

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 3

参考文献 74

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	李慧慧, 齐明, 孙仁金. 气候转型金融标准的国际实践及中国路径[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2025, 21(3): 428-439.
[2]	石英, 徐影, 巢清尘, 张梦然, 韩振宇, 王荣. 基于CMIP6多模式的南水北调西线工程区未来气候变化预估[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2025, 21(3): 340-352.
[3]	陈思达, 刘凯, 李博浩, 汪明. 中国脱贫县破纪录极端天气事件研究[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2025, 21(3): 327-339.
[4]	曲洋, 王铭铭, 周方卓, 黄俊灵, 常世彦. 基于气候因子框架的气候变化对能源系统的影响评估[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2025, 21(3): 353-363.
[5]	王英珊, 孙维君, 丁明虎, 刘伟刚, 杜文涛, 秦翔, 张东启. 青藏高原冰川物质平衡变化特征及其对气候变化响应的研究进展[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2025, 21(2): 208-220.
[6]	孙颖, 王东阡, 张学斌. 中国气候变化检测归因研究进展[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2025, 21(2): 153-168.
[7]	车慧正, 张晓春, 王剑琼, 沈小静, 张根, 徐婉筠, 郑宇, 张小曳. 瓦里关30年大气本底观测研究回顾和展望[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2025, 21(2): 186-197.
[8]	孙守琴, 谢汶天, 胡兆永, 王文志, 王根绪. 亚高山森林树木生长响应气候变化研究的前沿和挑战[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2025, 21(2): 198-207.
[9]	秦卓凡, 廖宏, 代慧斌. 气候变化影响我国大气重污染事件的研究进展[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2025, 21(1): 56-68.
[10]	吕学都, 陈佳琪, 葛慧, 朱乙丹. 气候金融实践与发展建议[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2025, 21(1): 78-90.
[11]	丁永建, 张世强, 陈仁升, 秦甲, 赵求东, 刘俊峰, 阳勇, 何晓波, 苌亚平, 上官冬辉, 韩添丁, 吴锦奎, 李向应. 气候变化对冰冻圈水文影响研究综述[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2025, 21(1): 1-21.
[12]	陈德亮, 谭显春, 彭喆, 闫洪硕, 程永龙. 人工智能在气候研究和服务中的机遇与挑战[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2024, 20(6): 669-681.
[13]	高翔. 国际条约下的气候资金问题辨析[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2024, 20(6): 799-807.
[14]	欧阳志云, 张观石, 应凌霄. 气候变化对青藏高原生态系统分布范围和生态功能的影响研究进展[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2024, 20(6): 699-710.
[15]	朱磊, 张丽忠, 蒋莹, 徐剑锋, 黄艳, 孙淑欣. 工业部门的气候适应研究进展[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2024, 20(6): 721-735.