| 25 Mar 2026
Scale-dependent biases in Alpine sub-daily areal precipitation extremes: added value of convection permitting models
Abstract. Intense sub-daily precipitation is a key driver of flash floods and debris flows. Convection-permitting models (CPMs) have shown improved representation of short-duration and localized precipitation extremes compared to coarser regional climate models (RCMs), yet their evaluation is typically performed at the native grid scale, neglecting hydrologically relevant spatial aggregations. Here, we assess how well CPM simulations represent areal precipitation extremes across durations from 1 to 24 h and spatial scales from ~ 10 to 5000 km2. We use hourly precipitation from Switzerland’s high-resolution radar–gauge product as reference and analyse simulations from the CORDEX Flagship Pilot Study on Convection Phenomena, including nine CPMs (2–3 km resolution) and seven driving RCMs (12–25 km resolution).
CPMs reproduce the observed spatial organization of short- and long-duration precipitation extremes more realistically than RCMs over complex terrain. For 1–3 h extremes, CPM bias strongly depends on the spatial scale, shifting from a ~15 % underestimation at native resolution to near-zero bias at ~400 km² and to ~20 % overestimation at ~4000 km². RCMs consistently underestimate precipitation extremes across all spatial scales, although the bias decreases with aggregation. For longer durations (6–24 h), both ensembles show an approximately scale-invariant positive bias of ~15 %. Biases also increase with elevation, particularly for daily extremes, highlighting challenges in modelling complex terrain and in radar–gauge observations. Overall, CPMs offer important added value for representing short-duration extremes, but scale-dependent biases must be accounted for when translating CPM outputs into flood-risk assessments.
Competing interests: At least one of the (co-)authors is a member of the editorial board of Hydrology and Earth System Sciences.
Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this paper. While Copernicus Publications makes every effort to include appropriate place names, the final responsibility lies with the authors. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.
