YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • AMS
    • Weather and Forecasting
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • AMS
    • Weather and Forecasting
    • 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

    Verification of Multimodel Ensemble Forecasts of North Atlantic Tropical Cyclones

    Source: Weather and Forecasting:;2017:;volume( 032 ):;issue: 006::page 2083
    Author:
    Leonardo, Nicholas M.;Colle, Brian A.
    DOI: 10.1175/WAF-D-17-0058.1
    Publisher: American Meteorological Society
    Abstract: AbstractNorth Atlantic tropical cyclone (TC) forecasts from four ensemble prediction systems (EPSs) are verified using the National Hurricane Center?s (NHC) best tracks for the 2008?15 seasons. The 1?5-day forecasts are evaluated for the 21-member National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) Global Ensemble Forecast System (GEFS), the 23-member UKMO ensemble (UKMET), and the 51-member European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) ensemble, as well as a combination of these ensembles [Multimodel Global (MMG)]. Several deterministic models are also evaluated, such as the Global Forecast System (GFSdet), Hurricane Weather Research and Forecasting Model (HWRF), the deterministic ECMWF model (ECdet), and the Geophysical Fluid Dynamical Laboratory model (GFDL).The ECdet track errors are the smallest on average at all lead times, but are not significantly different from the GEFS and ECMWF ensemble means. All models have a slow bias (90?240 km) in the along-track direction by 120 h, while there is little bias in the cross-track direction. Much of this slow bias is attributed to TCs undergoing extratropical transition (ET). All EPSs are underdispersed in the along-track direction, while the ECMWF is slightly overdispersed in the cross-track direction. The MMG and ECMWF track forecasts have more probabilistic skill than the ECdet and comparable skill to the NHC climatology-based cone forecast. TC intensity errors for the HWRF and GFDL are lower than the coarser models within the first 24 h, but are comparable to the ECdet at longer lead times. The ECMWF and MMG have comparable or better probabilistic intensity forecasts than the ECdet, while the GEFS?s weak bias limits its skill.
    • Download: (3.581Mb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Verification of Multimodel Ensemble Forecasts of North Atlantic Tropical Cyclones

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4246662
    Collections
    • Weather and Forecasting

    Show full item record

    contributor authorLeonardo, Nicholas M.;Colle, Brian A.
    date accessioned2018-01-03T11:03:22Z
    date available2018-01-03T11:03:22Z
    date copyright9/29/2017 12:00:00 AM
    date issued2017
    identifier otherwaf-d-17-0058.1.pdf
    identifier urihttp://138.201.223.254:8080/yetl1/handle/yetl/4246662
    description abstractAbstractNorth Atlantic tropical cyclone (TC) forecasts from four ensemble prediction systems (EPSs) are verified using the National Hurricane Center?s (NHC) best tracks for the 2008?15 seasons. The 1?5-day forecasts are evaluated for the 21-member National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) Global Ensemble Forecast System (GEFS), the 23-member UKMO ensemble (UKMET), and the 51-member European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) ensemble, as well as a combination of these ensembles [Multimodel Global (MMG)]. Several deterministic models are also evaluated, such as the Global Forecast System (GFSdet), Hurricane Weather Research and Forecasting Model (HWRF), the deterministic ECMWF model (ECdet), and the Geophysical Fluid Dynamical Laboratory model (GFDL).The ECdet track errors are the smallest on average at all lead times, but are not significantly different from the GEFS and ECMWF ensemble means. All models have a slow bias (90?240 km) in the along-track direction by 120 h, while there is little bias in the cross-track direction. Much of this slow bias is attributed to TCs undergoing extratropical transition (ET). All EPSs are underdispersed in the along-track direction, while the ECMWF is slightly overdispersed in the cross-track direction. The MMG and ECMWF track forecasts have more probabilistic skill than the ECdet and comparable skill to the NHC climatology-based cone forecast. TC intensity errors for the HWRF and GFDL are lower than the coarser models within the first 24 h, but are comparable to the ECdet at longer lead times. The ECMWF and MMG have comparable or better probabilistic intensity forecasts than the ECdet, while the GEFS?s weak bias limits its skill.
    publisherAmerican Meteorological Society
    titleVerification of Multimodel Ensemble Forecasts of North Atlantic Tropical Cyclones
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume32
    journal issue6
    journal titleWeather and Forecasting
    identifier doi10.1175/WAF-D-17-0058.1
    journal fristpage2083
    treeWeather and Forecasting:;2017:;volume( 032 ):;issue: 006
    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