YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • AMS
    • Monthly Weather Review
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • AMS
    • Monthly Weather Review
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Empirical Correction of a Coupled Land–Atmosphere Model

    Source: Monthly Weather Review:;2008:;volume( 136 ):;issue: 011::page 4063
    Author:
    DelSole, Timothy
    ,
    Zhao, Mei
    ,
    Dirmeyer, Paul A.
    ,
    Kirtman, Ben P.
    DOI: 10.1175/2008MWR2344.1
    Publisher: American Meteorological Society
    Abstract: This paper investigates empirical strategies for correcting the bias of a coupled land?atmosphere model and tests the hypothesis that a bias correction can improve the skill of such models. The correction strategies investigated include 1) relaxation methods, 2) nudging based on long-term biases, and 3) nudging based on tendency errors. The last method involves estimating the tendency errors of prognostic variables based on short forecasts?say lead times of 24 h or less?and then subtracting the climatological mean value of the tendency errors at every time step. By almost any measure, the best correction strategy is found to be nudging based on tendency errors. This method significantly reduces biases in the long-term forecasts of temperature and soil moisture, and preserves the variance of the forecast field, unlike relaxation methods. Tendency errors estimated from ten 1-day forecasts produced just as effective corrections as tendency errors estimated from all days in a month, implying that the method is trivial to implement by modern standards. Disappointingly, none of the methods investigated consistently improved the random error variance of the model, although this finding may be model dependent. Nevertheless, the empirical correction method is argued to be worthwhile even if it improves only the bias, because the method has only marginal impacts on the numerical speed and represents forecast error in the form of a tendency error that can be compared directly to other terms in the tendency equations, which in turn provides clues as to the source of the forecast error.
    • Download: (1.772Mb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Empirical Correction of a Coupled Land–Atmosphere Model

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4209291
    Collections
    • Monthly Weather Review

    Show full item record

    contributor authorDelSole, Timothy
    contributor authorZhao, Mei
    contributor authorDirmeyer, Paul A.
    contributor authorKirtman, Ben P.
    date accessioned2017-06-09T16:26:02Z
    date available2017-06-09T16:26:02Z
    date copyright2008/11/01
    date issued2008
    identifier issn0027-0644
    identifier otherams-67803.pdf
    identifier urihttp://onlinelibrary.yabesh.ir/handle/yetl/4209291
    description abstractThis paper investigates empirical strategies for correcting the bias of a coupled land?atmosphere model and tests the hypothesis that a bias correction can improve the skill of such models. The correction strategies investigated include 1) relaxation methods, 2) nudging based on long-term biases, and 3) nudging based on tendency errors. The last method involves estimating the tendency errors of prognostic variables based on short forecasts?say lead times of 24 h or less?and then subtracting the climatological mean value of the tendency errors at every time step. By almost any measure, the best correction strategy is found to be nudging based on tendency errors. This method significantly reduces biases in the long-term forecasts of temperature and soil moisture, and preserves the variance of the forecast field, unlike relaxation methods. Tendency errors estimated from ten 1-day forecasts produced just as effective corrections as tendency errors estimated from all days in a month, implying that the method is trivial to implement by modern standards. Disappointingly, none of the methods investigated consistently improved the random error variance of the model, although this finding may be model dependent. Nevertheless, the empirical correction method is argued to be worthwhile even if it improves only the bias, because the method has only marginal impacts on the numerical speed and represents forecast error in the form of a tendency error that can be compared directly to other terms in the tendency equations, which in turn provides clues as to the source of the forecast error.
    publisherAmerican Meteorological Society
    titleEmpirical Correction of a Coupled Land–Atmosphere Model
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume136
    journal issue11
    journal titleMonthly Weather Review
    identifier doi10.1175/2008MWR2344.1
    journal fristpage4063
    journal lastpage4076
    treeMonthly Weather Review:;2008:;volume( 136 ):;issue: 011
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian