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

    Evaluation of Cool-Season Extratropical Cyclones in a Multimodel Ensemble for Eastern North America and the Western Atlantic Ocean

    Source: Weather and Forecasting:;2017:;volume 033:;issue 001::page 109
    Author:
    Korfe, Nathan G.
    ,
    Colle, Brian A.
    DOI: 10.1175/WAF-D-17-0036.1
    Publisher: American Meteorological Society
    Abstract: AbstractThis paper evaluates the extratropical cyclones within three operational global ensembles [the 20-member Canadian Meteorological Centre (CMC), 20-member National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP), and 50-member European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF)]. The day-0?6 forecasts were evaluated over the eastern United States and western Atlantic for the 2007?15 cool seasons (October?March) using the ECMWF?s ERA-Interim dataset as the verifying analysis. The Hodges cyclone-tracking scheme was used to track cyclones using 6-h mean sea level pressure (MSLP) data. For lead times less than 72 h, the NCEP and ECMWF ensembles have comparable mean absolute errors in cyclone intensity and track, while the CMC errors are larger. For days 4?6 ECMWF has 12?18 and 24?30 h more accuracy for cyclone intensity than NCEP and CMC, respectively. All ensembles underpredict relatively deep cyclones in the medium range, with one area near the Gulf Stream. CMC, NCEP, and ECMWF all have a slow along-track bias that is significant from 24 to 90 h, and they have a left-of-track bias from 120 to 144 h. ECMWF has greater probabilistic skill for intensity and track than CMC and NCEP, while the 90-member multimodel ensemble (NCEP + CMC + ECMWF) has more probabilistic skill than any single ensemble. During the medium range, the ECMWF + NCEP + CMC multimodel ensemble has the fewest cases (1.9%, 1.8%, and 1.0%) outside the envelope compared to ECMWF (5.6%, 5.2%, and 4.1%) and NCEP (13.7%, 10.6%, and 11.0%) for cyclone intensity and along- and cross-track positions.
    • Download: (3.389Mb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Evaluation of Cool-Season Extratropical Cyclones in a Multimodel Ensemble for Eastern North America and the Western Atlantic Ocean

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4261351
    Collections
    • Weather and Forecasting

    Show full item record

    contributor authorKorfe, Nathan G.
    contributor authorColle, Brian A.
    date accessioned2019-09-19T10:05:09Z
    date available2019-09-19T10:05:09Z
    date copyright11/27/2017 12:00:00 AM
    date issued2017
    identifier otherwaf-d-17-0036.1.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4261351
    description abstractAbstractThis paper evaluates the extratropical cyclones within three operational global ensembles [the 20-member Canadian Meteorological Centre (CMC), 20-member National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP), and 50-member European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF)]. The day-0?6 forecasts were evaluated over the eastern United States and western Atlantic for the 2007?15 cool seasons (October?March) using the ECMWF?s ERA-Interim dataset as the verifying analysis. The Hodges cyclone-tracking scheme was used to track cyclones using 6-h mean sea level pressure (MSLP) data. For lead times less than 72 h, the NCEP and ECMWF ensembles have comparable mean absolute errors in cyclone intensity and track, while the CMC errors are larger. For days 4?6 ECMWF has 12?18 and 24?30 h more accuracy for cyclone intensity than NCEP and CMC, respectively. All ensembles underpredict relatively deep cyclones in the medium range, with one area near the Gulf Stream. CMC, NCEP, and ECMWF all have a slow along-track bias that is significant from 24 to 90 h, and they have a left-of-track bias from 120 to 144 h. ECMWF has greater probabilistic skill for intensity and track than CMC and NCEP, while the 90-member multimodel ensemble (NCEP + CMC + ECMWF) has more probabilistic skill than any single ensemble. During the medium range, the ECMWF + NCEP + CMC multimodel ensemble has the fewest cases (1.9%, 1.8%, and 1.0%) outside the envelope compared to ECMWF (5.6%, 5.2%, and 4.1%) and NCEP (13.7%, 10.6%, and 11.0%) for cyclone intensity and along- and cross-track positions.
    publisherAmerican Meteorological Society
    titleEvaluation of Cool-Season Extratropical Cyclones in a Multimodel Ensemble for Eastern North America and the Western Atlantic Ocean
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume33
    journal issue1
    journal titleWeather and Forecasting
    identifier doi10.1175/WAF-D-17-0036.1
    journal fristpage109
    journal lastpage127
    treeWeather and Forecasting:;2017:;volume 033:;issue 001
    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