Completion of the Central Italy daily precipitation instrumental data series from 1951 to 2019
Gamal AbdElNasser Allam Abouzied,Guoqiang Tang,Simon Michael Papalexiou,Martyn P. Clark,Eleonora Aruffo,Piero Di Carlo
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/gdj3.267
2024-09-25
Geoscience Data Journal
Abstract:Description of the study area and problem related to missing values and gaps in the data. (Figures 1 and 2). This method combines the outcome of 15 strategies based on four various gap‐filling techniques: Four of them rely on quantile mapping with nearby stations (QM). One is based on quantile mapping with concurrent ERA5 estimations (QMR). Four are based on spatial interpolation methods (INT). Four are based on machine learning techniques (ML). Two use multi‐strategy merging (MRG). RSME, CC, and the KGE′′ are three performance measures used to evaluate the estimated precipitation data from the proposed techniques. (Figure 3). Generating the final SCD and evaluating it using KGE′′ and its three elements CC, α, and β (Figure 4). Precipitation is a critical part of the global hydrological cycle that determines the distribution of water resources. It is also an essential meteorological variable used as input for hydroclimatic models and projections. However, precipitation data frequently lack complete series, especially at daily and sub‐daily precipitation stations, which are usually large, bulky, and complex. To address this, gap filling is commonly used to produce complete hydrometeorological data series without missing values. Several gap‐filling methods have been developed and improved. This study seeks to fill the gaps of 201 daily precipitation time series in Central Italy by localizing the approach used to generate the Serially Complete dataset for the Planet Earth (SC‐Earth). This method combines the outcome of 15 strategies based on four various gap‐filling techniques (quantile mapping, spatial interpolation, machine learning, and multi‐strategy merging). These strategies employ the daily dataset of the neighbouring stations and the matched ERA5 data to estimate missing values at the target stations. Both raw data and the final serially complete station datasets (SCDs) underwent comprehensive quality control. Many accuracy indicators have been utilized to evaluate the performance of the strategies' estimations and the final SCD, such as Correlation Coefficient (CC), Root mean square error (RMSE), Relative bias (Bias %), and Kling‐Gupta efficiency (KGE′′). Multi‐strategy merging strategy based on the Modified Kling‐Gupta efficiency (MS1) shows the highest performance as an individual precipitation gap‐filling strategy. However, the machine learning strategy using random forest (ML3) has the most outstanding share in the final estimates among all other strategies. In the end, the temporal–spatial performance of the final SCD is promising and depends on the pattern of the missing values (MV%). The mean values of KGE′′, CC, variability (α), and bias term (β) are 0.9, 0.93, 1.064, and 4.98 × 10−7, respectively.
geosciences, multidisciplinary,meteorology & atmospheric sciences