the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
| 10 Feb 2026
A simple weather generator that converts statistical information from downscaled global climate models to 24-hr precipitation input for hydrological models
Abstract. A weather generator can provide a link between downscaled precipitation or temperature statistics on the one hand, and impact models that require daily data as input on the other. A simple design for a weather generator for daily precipitation is described together with results from an evaluation against rain gauge observations from Norway, Ghana and Romania. The results from the evaluation indicate that it gives a close approximation of the observed characteristics for daily precipitation in different climatological settings. A simple weather generator for daily temperature is also presented, and an assessment of its performance also suggests a reasonable skill level. These weather generators are part of the free and open-access R-package 'esd'.
- Preprint
(1647 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 09 May 2026)
-
CEC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-351 - No compliance with the policy of the journal', Juan Antonio Añel, 25 Mar 2026
reply
-
CEC2: 'Reply on CEC1', Juan Antonio Añel, 25 Mar 2026
reply
As an additional note to my previous comment, and to clarify, the data stored in FigShare are perfectly stored, and we can accept FigShare as a permanent repository.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-351-CEC2 -
AC1: 'Reply on CEC2', Rasmus Benestad, 26 Mar 2026
reply
I have revised the Code and data availability by inclusding a reference to the ECA&D data: Klein Tank, A. J. B. W., Konnen, G. P., Böhm, R., Demarée, G., Gocheva, A., Mileta, M., Pashiardis, S., Hejkrlik, L., Kern-Hansen, C., Heino, R., Bessemoulin, P., Müller-Westermeier, G., Tzanakou, M., Szalai, S., Pálsdóttir, T., Fitzgerald, D., Rubin, S., Capaldo, M., Maugeri, M., Leitass, A., Bukantis, A., Aberfeld, R., Engelen, A. F. V. v., Førland, E., Mietus, M., Coelho, F., Mares, C., Razuvaev, V., Nieplova, E., Cegnar, T., López, J. A., Dahlström, B., Moberg, A., Kirchhofer, W., Ceylan, A., Pachaliuk, O., Alexander, L. V., and Petrovic, P.: Daily dataset of 20th-century surface air temperature and precipitation series for the European Climate Assessment, International Journal of Climatology, 22, 1441–1453, https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.773, 2002.
I hope this is what was required.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-351-AC1 -
CEC3: 'Reply on AC1', Juan Antonio Añel, 26 Mar 2026
reply
Dear Dr. Benestad,
Thanks for the quick reply. Unfortunately, we can not accept this. You have cited a paper, not a repository. You must provide a repository (link and permanent handler, e.g. DOI) that contains all the data used and produced in your study.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-351-CEC3 -
AC2: 'Reply on CEC3', Rasmus Benestad, 27 Mar 2026
reply
I have added the ECA&D data to Figshare with a DOI and revised the Code and data availability section:
Code and data availability. Code for the WGs is available as part of the open-source R-package ’esd’ version 1.11.21 from FigShare DOI:10.6084/m9.figshare.1160493.v18 (Benestad and Mezghani, 2026). Some of the data is provided as a part of the R-package, except for the rain gauge data from Ghana. The ECA&D (Klein Tank et al., 2002) data used as an example here is public and available from https://www.ecad.eu/dailydata/, however, similar demonstrations can be done with other daily rain gauge data. A copy of the Romanian Cluj Napoca ECA&D record is provided in DOI:10.6084/m9.figshare.31869940 where it is stored as an esd-station object stored in the native R-binary ’.rda’ format that can be read using ’load(<file name>)’. The Met Ghana record used in the SPRINGS project is not open and nor free to share, but there is a record available from Akuse in GHCND with doubtful quality which is also provided in DOI:10.6084/m9.figshare.31869940. The data in this case is not important, as it merely serves for demonstration purposes, and an evaluation of the WG should also involve other data records.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-351-AC2 -
CEC4: 'Reply on AC2', Juan Antonio Añel, 27 Mar 2026
reply
Dear Dr. Benestad,
Many thanks for the quick reply. I have checked the repositories and we can consider now the current version of your manuscript in compliance with the code policy of the journal.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-351-CEC4
-
CEC4: 'Reply on AC2', Juan Antonio Añel, 27 Mar 2026
reply
-
AC2: 'Reply on CEC3', Rasmus Benestad, 27 Mar 2026
reply
-
CEC3: 'Reply on AC1', Juan Antonio Añel, 26 Mar 2026
reply
-
AC1: 'Reply on CEC2', Rasmus Benestad, 26 Mar 2026
reply
-
CEC2: 'Reply on CEC1', Juan Antonio Añel, 25 Mar 2026
reply
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-351', Anonymous Referee #1, 26 Apr 2026
reply
Review of 'A simple weather generator that converts statistical information from downscaled global climate models to 24-hr precipitation input for hydrological models’ by Rasmus E. Benestad
This manuscript is submitted to GMD as a ‘Development and technical paper’. The manuscript describes a simple weather generator (WG) and demonstrates the performance of the WG at a few locations. While the methodology is well documented and the text is straightforward to follow, the following comments must be addressed before this manuscript can be considered for publication.
Major Comments
As per the requirements of the journal - “Development and technical papers usually include a significant amount of evaluation against standard benchmarks, observations, and/or other model output as appropriate”. I am not fully convinced about the performance of the WG. I recommend the author to provide more robust performance evaluation at several other locations.
The text inside the figures, the axis labels, and the legends are too small and often extremely difficult to read. It seems that the figures were prepared in a rush. I recommend the author to improve the figure quality.
Minor Comments
L1: If possible, simplify this sentence.
L3: Mention how many stations are used.
L4, L6: Explain ‘close approximation’ and ‘reasonable skill level’ with a number or error metric.
L6: Consider removing this sentence.
L1-7: The abstract seems more like a plain language summary. I recommend the author to think carefully about the abstract.
L20: Please add a couple of citations.
L23: Please add a couple of relevant citations, to which a new reader can refer to if they want more information about downscaling.
L39: Please provide a sentence describing why previous weather generators were not designed to connect with ESD.
L40: Provide full name of the SPRINGS project. Additionally, the relevance of the SPRINGS project is not clear.
L45: Mentioning names of a couple of relevant and popular hydrological models might be useful.
L55: I recommend adding one sentence better describing the cut-off threshold.
L69: A sentence or two describing the equation would be helpful.
L75: The choice of default smudge factor should be explained.
L93, 94, 102: ‘good agreement’, ‘modest deviations’, ‘comparable to the observations’ - These qualitative descriptions should be avoided and the author must provide quantitative metrics for evaluation of the Weather Generator.
Figure1: The schematic could be improved. In my opinion, the description provided in the caption is not properly reflected in the figure.
Figure2: It is not clear what the colors represent.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-351-RC1
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 200 | 128 | 18 | 346 | 43 | 54 |
- HTML: 200
- PDF: 128
- XML: 18
- Total: 346
- BibTeX: 43
- EndNote: 54
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
Dear Dr. Benestad,
Unfortunately, after checking your manuscript, it has come to our attention that it does not comply with our "Code and Data Policy".
https://www.geoscientific-model-development.net/policies/code_and_data_policy.html
In the Code and Data Availability section you have not provided permanent repositories for all the data used in your work. Instead, you provide some data in the FigShare repository, stating that the data for Ghana are not accessible, and linking a site (ECA&D) which is not a trusted repository for long-term archival, and therefore is not acceptable according to the policy of the journal. Because of it, your manuscript should not have been accepted for Discussions or peer review.
The GMD review and publication process depends on reviewers and community commentators being able to access, during the discussion phase, the code and data on which a manuscript depends, and on ensuring the provenance of replicability of the published papers for years after their publication. Please, therefore, publish your data in one of the appropriate repositories and reply to this comment with the relevant information (link and a permanent identifier for it (e.g. DOI)) as soon as possible. We cannot have manuscripts under discussion that do not comply with our policy.
The 'Code and Data Availability’ section must also be modified to cite the new repository locations, and corresponding references added to the bibliography.
I must note that if you do not fix this problem, we cannot continue with the peer-review process or accept your manuscript for publication in GMD.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor