38 citations as recorded by crossref.

1. Variable sensitivity analysis in groundwater level projections under climate change adopting a hybrid machine learning algorithm A. Sharghi et al. 10.1016/j.envsoft.2024.106264
2. Assessing the sensitivity of hydro-climatological change detection methods to model uncertainty and bias Z. Jiang et al. 10.1016/j.advwatres.2019.103430
3. Impacts of bias nonstationarity of climate model outputs on hydrological simulations Y. Hui et al. 10.2166/nh.2020.254
4. Scaled distribution mapping: a bias correction method that preserves raw climate model projected changes M. Switanek et al. 10.5194/hess-21-2649-2017
5. Regional climate modeling over China with COSMO‐CLM: Performance assessment and climate projections E. Bucchignani et al. 10.1002/2014JD022219
6. Do Derived Drought Indices Better Characterize Future Drought Change? Z. Jiang et al. 10.1029/2022EF003350
7. Assessing temperature and precipitation bias nonstationarity of CMIP6 global climate models over Iran N. Azad & A. Ahmadi 10.1007/s00704-024-05322-w
8. Evaluating the Time-Invariance Hypothesis of Climate Model Bias Correction: Implications for Hydrological Impact Studies J. Velázquez et al. 10.1175/JHM-D-14-0159.1
9. Bias correction can modify climate model simulated precipitation changes without adverse effect on the ensemble mean E. Maurer & D. Pierce 10.5194/hess-18-915-2014
10. Evaluation of Reanalysis Precipitation Data and Potential Bias Correction Methods for Use in Data-Scarce Areas V. Garibay et al. 10.1007/s11269-021-02804-8
11. Projected Changes in United States Regional Extreme Heat Days Derived From Bivariate Quantile Mapping of CMIP5 Simulations J. Schoof et al. 10.1029/2018JD029599
12. Patterns in Climate-Related Parameters as Proxy for Rainfall Deficiency and Aridity: Application to Burkina Faso A. Garcia-Aristizabal et al. 10.1061/AJRUA6.0000860
13. Assessing the limits of bias‐correcting climate model outputs for climate change impact studies J. Chen et al. 10.1002/2014JD022635
14. Identifying robust bias adjustment methods for European extreme precipitation in a multi-model pseudo-reality setting T. Schmith et al. 10.5194/hess-25-273-2021
15. What are the impacts of bias correction on future drought projections? F. Johnson & A. Sharma 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.04.002
16. Addressing Spatial Dependence Bias in Climate Model Simulations—An Independent Component Analysis Approach J. Nahar et al. 10.1002/2017WR021293
17. Observed and Projected Scaling of Daily Extreme Precipitation with Dew Point Temperature at Annual and Seasonal Scales across the Northeast United Sates S. Steinschneider & N. Najibi 10.1175/JHM-D-21-0183.1
18. A rank-based approach for correcting systematic biases in spatial disaggregation of coarse-scale climate simulations J. Nahar et al. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.05.045
19. Analysis of Expected Climate Extreme Variability with Regional Climate Simulations over Napoli Capodichino Airport: A Contribution to a Climate Risk Assessment Framework E. Bucchignani et al. 10.3390/earth2040058
20. Accuracy of daily estimation of grass reference evapotranspiration using ERA-Interim reanalysis products with assessment of alternative bias correction schemes P. Paredes et al. 10.1016/j.agwat.2018.08.003
21. Assessing the extent of non-stationary biases in GCMs J. Nahar et al. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.03.045
22. Technical Note: The impact of spatial scale in bias correction of climate model output for hydrologic impact studies E. Maurer et al. 10.5194/hess-20-685-2016
23. Bias adjustment to preserve changes in variability: the unbiased mapping of GCM changes C. Chadwick et al. 10.1080/02626667.2023.2201450
24. Effects of climate change on shallow landslides in a small coastal catchment in southern Italy F. Ciervo et al. 10.1007/s10346-016-0743-1
25. Design considerations for riverine floods in a changing climate – A review B. François et al. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.04.068
26. Impact of bias nonstationarity on the performance of uni- and multivariate bias-adjusting methods: a case study on data from Uccle, Belgium J. Van de Velde et al. 10.5194/hess-26-2319-2022
27. Hydrologic extremes – an intercomparison of multiple gridded statistical downscaling methods A. Werner & A. Cannon 10.5194/hess-20-1483-2016
28. How May the Choice of Downscaling Techniques and Meteorological Reference Observations Affect Future Hydroclimate Projections? D. Rastogi et al. 10.1029/2022EF002734
29. Projected changes in future climate over the Midwest and Great Lakes region using downscaled CMIP5 ensembles K. Byun & A. Hamlet 10.1002/joc.5388
30. Estimating Future Surface Water Availability Through an Integrated Climate‐Hydrology‐Management Modeling Framework at a Basin Scale Under CMIP6 Scenarios M. Shao et al. 10.1029/2022WR034099
31. Enumerating the Effects of Climate Change on Water Resources Using GCM Scenarios at the Xin’anjiang Watershed, China M. Zaman et al. 10.3390/w10101296
32. Impacts of correcting the inter-variable correlation of climate model outputs on hydrological modeling J. Chen et al. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.03.040
33. Evaluating the effect of climate change on areal reduction factors using regional climate model projections J. Li et al. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.06.067
34. Assessing bias corrections of oceanic surface conditions for atmospheric models J. Beaumet et al. 10.5194/gmd-12-321-2019
35. An integrated assessment of extreme hydrometeorological events in Bangladesh S. Moghim & A. Takallou 10.1007/s00477-023-02404-5
36. Technical Note: Bias correcting climate model simulated daily temperature extremes with quantile mapping B. Thrasher et al. 10.5194/hess-16-3309-2012
37. Evaluation of Precipitation Datasets from TRMM Satellite and Down-scaled Reanalysis Products with Bias-correction in Middle Qilian Mountain, China L. Zhang et al. 10.1007/s11769-021-1205-9
38. The stationarity of two statistical downscaling methods for precipitation under different choices of cross‐validation periods Y. Wang et al. 10.1002/joc.5375