Comparison of Objective Supercell Identification Techniques Using an Idealized Cloud ModelSource: Monthly Weather Review:;2012:;volume( 140 ):;issue: 007::page 2090Author:Naylor, Jason
,
Gilmore, Matthew S.
,
Thompson, Richard L.
,
Edwards, Roger
,
Wilhelmson, Robert B.
DOI: 10.1175/MWR-D-11-00209.1Publisher: American Meteorological Society
Abstract: he accuracy, reliability, and skill of several objective supercell identification methods are evaluated using 113 simulations from an idealized cloud model with 1-km horizontal grid spacing. Horizontal cross sections of vorticity and radar reflectivity at both mid- and low levels were analyzed for the presence of a supercell, every 5 min of simulation time, to develop a ?truth? database. Supercells were identified using well-known characteristics such as hook echoes, inflow notches, bounded weak-echo regions (BWERs), and the presence of significant vertical vorticity.The three objective supercell identification techniques compared were the Pearson correlation (PC) using an analysis window centered on the midlevel storm updraft; a modified Pearson correlation (MPC), which calculates the PC at every point in the horizontal using a small 3 km ? 3 km analysis window; and updraft helicity (UH). Results show that the UH method integrated from 2 to 5 km AGL, and using a threshold value of 180 m2 s?2, was equally as accurate as the MPC technique?averaged from 2 to 5 km AGL and using a minimum updraft threshold of 7 m s?1 with a detection threshold of 0.3?in discriminating between supercells and nonsupercells for 1-km horizontal grid spacing simulations. At courser resolutions, the UH technique performed best, while the MPC technique produced the largest threat scores for higher-resolution simulations. In addition, requiring that the supercell detection thresholds last at least 20 min reduced the number of false alarms.
|
Collections
Show full item record
contributor author | Naylor, Jason | |
contributor author | Gilmore, Matthew S. | |
contributor author | Thompson, Richard L. | |
contributor author | Edwards, Roger | |
contributor author | Wilhelmson, Robert B. | |
date accessioned | 2017-06-09T17:29:36Z | |
date available | 2017-06-09T17:29:36Z | |
date copyright | 2012/07/01 | |
date issued | 2012 | |
identifier issn | 0027-0644 | |
identifier other | ams-86219.pdf | |
identifier uri | http://onlinelibrary.yabesh.ir/handle/yetl/4229753 | |
description abstract | he accuracy, reliability, and skill of several objective supercell identification methods are evaluated using 113 simulations from an idealized cloud model with 1-km horizontal grid spacing. Horizontal cross sections of vorticity and radar reflectivity at both mid- and low levels were analyzed for the presence of a supercell, every 5 min of simulation time, to develop a ?truth? database. Supercells were identified using well-known characteristics such as hook echoes, inflow notches, bounded weak-echo regions (BWERs), and the presence of significant vertical vorticity.The three objective supercell identification techniques compared were the Pearson correlation (PC) using an analysis window centered on the midlevel storm updraft; a modified Pearson correlation (MPC), which calculates the PC at every point in the horizontal using a small 3 km ? 3 km analysis window; and updraft helicity (UH). Results show that the UH method integrated from 2 to 5 km AGL, and using a threshold value of 180 m2 s?2, was equally as accurate as the MPC technique?averaged from 2 to 5 km AGL and using a minimum updraft threshold of 7 m s?1 with a detection threshold of 0.3?in discriminating between supercells and nonsupercells for 1-km horizontal grid spacing simulations. At courser resolutions, the UH technique performed best, while the MPC technique produced the largest threat scores for higher-resolution simulations. In addition, requiring that the supercell detection thresholds last at least 20 min reduced the number of false alarms. | |
publisher | American Meteorological Society | |
title | Comparison of Objective Supercell Identification Techniques Using an Idealized Cloud Model | |
type | Journal Paper | |
journal volume | 140 | |
journal issue | 7 | |
journal title | Monthly Weather Review | |
identifier doi | 10.1175/MWR-D-11-00209.1 | |
journal fristpage | 2090 | |
journal lastpage | 2102 | |
tree | Monthly Weather Review:;2012:;volume( 140 ):;issue: 007 | |
contenttype | Fulltext |