Postprocessing Next-Day Ensemble Probabilistic Precipitation Forecasts Using Random Forests
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.


This Document Has Been Replaced By:



This Document Has Been Retired


Up-to-date Information

This is the latest update:

Postprocessing Next-Day Ensemble Probabilistic Precipitation Forecasts Using Random Forests
  • Published Date:


  • Source:
    Wea. Forecasting (2019) 34 (6): 2017–2044.
Filetype[PDF-5.07 MB]

This document cannot be previewed automatically as it exceeds 5 MB
Please click the thumbnail image to view the document.
Postprocessing Next-Day Ensemble Probabilistic Precipitation Forecasts Using Random Forests
  • Description:
    Most ensembles suffer from underdispersion and systematic biases. One way to correct for these shortcomings is via machine learning (ML), which is advantageous due to its ability to identify and correct nonlinear biases. This study uses a single random forest (RF) to calibrate next-day (i.e., 12–36-h lead time) probabilistic precipitation forecasts over the contiguous United States (CONUS) from the Short-Range Ensemble Forecast System (SREF) with 16-km grid spacing and the High-Resolution Ensemble Forecast version 2 (HREFv2) with 3-km grid spacing. Random forest forecast probabilities (RFFPs) from each ensemble are compared against raw ensemble probabilities over 496 days from April 2017 to November 2018 using 16-fold cross validation. RFFPs are also compared against spatially smoothed ensemble probabilities since the raw SREF and HREFv2 probabilities are overconfident and undersample the true forecast probability density function. Probabilistic precipitation forecasts are evaluated at four precipitation thresholds ranging from 0.1 to 3 in. In general, RFFPs are found to have better forecast reliability and resolution, fewer spatial biases, and significantly greater Brier skill scores and areas under the relative operating characteristic curve compared to corresponding raw and spatially smoothed ensemble probabilities. The RFFPs perform best at the lower thresholds, which have a greater observed climatological frequency. Additionally, the RF-based postprocessing technique benefits the SREF more than the HREFv2, likely because the raw SREF forecasts contain more systematic biases than those from the raw HREFv2. It is concluded that the RFFPs provide a convenient, skillful summary of calibrated ensemble output and are computationally feasible to implement in real time. Advantages and disadvantages of ML-based postprocessing techniques are discussed.
  • Document Type:
  • Main Document Checksum:
  • File Type:
  • Supporting Files:
    No Additional Files

You May Also Like: