UntitledSource: Weather and Forecasting:;2017:;volume( 032 ):;issue: 004::page 1403DOI: 10.1175/WAF-D-16-0200.1Publisher: American Meteorological Society
Abstract: AbstractGiven increasing computing power, an important question is whether additional computational resources would be better spent reducing the horizontal grid spacing of a convection-allowing model (CAM) or adding members to form CAM ensembles. The present study investigates this question as it applies to CAM-derived next-day probabilistic severe weather forecasts created by using forecast updraft helicity as a severe weather proxy for 63 days of the 2010 and 2011 NOAA Hazardous Weather Testbed Spring Forecasting Experiments. Forecasts derived from three sets of Weather Research and Forecasting Model configurations are tested: a 1-km deterministic model, a 4-km deterministic model, and an 11-member, 4-km ensemble. Forecast quality is evaluated using relative operating characteristic (ROC) curves, attributes diagrams, and performance diagrams, and forecasts from five representative cases are analyzed to investigate their relative quality and value in a variety of situations. While no statistically significant differences exist between the 4- and 1-km deterministic forecasts in terms of area under ROC curves, the 4-km ensemble forecasts offer weakly significant improvements over the 4-km deterministic forecasts over the entire 63-day dataset. Further, the 4-km ensemble forecasts generally provide greater forecast quality relative to either of the deterministic forecasts on an individual day. Collectively, these results suggest that, for purposes of improving next-day CAM-derived probabilistic severe weather forecasts, additional computing resources may be better spent on adding members to form CAM ensembles than on reducing the horizontal grid spacing of a deterministic model below 4 km.
|
Collections
Show full item record
| contributor author | Loken, Eric D.;Clark, Adam J.;Xue, Ming;Kong, Fanyou | |
| date accessioned | 2018-01-03T11:03:15Z | |
| date available | 2018-01-03T11:03:15Z | |
| date copyright | 6/1/2017 12:00:00 AM | |
| date issued | 2017 | |
| identifier other | waf-d-16-0200.1.pdf | |
| identifier uri | http://138.201.223.254:8080/yetl1/handle/yetl/4246631 | |
| description abstract | AbstractGiven increasing computing power, an important question is whether additional computational resources would be better spent reducing the horizontal grid spacing of a convection-allowing model (CAM) or adding members to form CAM ensembles. The present study investigates this question as it applies to CAM-derived next-day probabilistic severe weather forecasts created by using forecast updraft helicity as a severe weather proxy for 63 days of the 2010 and 2011 NOAA Hazardous Weather Testbed Spring Forecasting Experiments. Forecasts derived from three sets of Weather Research and Forecasting Model configurations are tested: a 1-km deterministic model, a 4-km deterministic model, and an 11-member, 4-km ensemble. Forecast quality is evaluated using relative operating characteristic (ROC) curves, attributes diagrams, and performance diagrams, and forecasts from five representative cases are analyzed to investigate their relative quality and value in a variety of situations. While no statistically significant differences exist between the 4- and 1-km deterministic forecasts in terms of area under ROC curves, the 4-km ensemble forecasts offer weakly significant improvements over the 4-km deterministic forecasts over the entire 63-day dataset. Further, the 4-km ensemble forecasts generally provide greater forecast quality relative to either of the deterministic forecasts on an individual day. Collectively, these results suggest that, for purposes of improving next-day CAM-derived probabilistic severe weather forecasts, additional computing resources may be better spent on adding members to form CAM ensembles than on reducing the horizontal grid spacing of a deterministic model below 4 km. | |
| publisher | American Meteorological Society | |
| type | Journal Paper | |
| journal volume | 32 | |
| journal issue | 4 | |
| journal title | Weather and Forecasting | |
| identifier doi | 10.1175/WAF-D-16-0200.1 | |
| journal fristpage | 1403 | |
| journal lastpage | 1421 | |
| tree | Weather and Forecasting:;2017:;volume( 032 ):;issue: 004 | |
| contenttype | Fulltext |