A Comparison of Methods to Sample Model Errors for Convection-Allowing Ensemble Forecasts in the Setting of Multiscale Initial Conditions Produced by the GSI-Based EnVar Assimilation System
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.

Search our Collections & Repository

For very narrow results

When looking for a specific result

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields

Dates

to

Document Data
Library
People
Clear All
Clear All

For additional assistance using the Custom Query please check out our Help Page

i

A Comparison of Methods to Sample Model Errors for Convection-Allowing Ensemble Forecasts in the Setting of Multiscale Initial Conditions Produced by the GSI-Based EnVar Assimilation System

Filetype[PDF-4.29 MB]


Details You May Also Like

Details:

  • Journal Title:
    Monthly Weather Review
  • Personal Author:
  • NOAA Program & Office:
    OAR (Oceanic and Atmospheric Research)
  • Description:
    A gridpoint statistical interpolation (GSI)-based hybrid ensemble–variational (EnVar) scheme was extended for convective scales—including radar reflectivity assimilation—and implemented in real-time spring forecasting experiments. This study compares methods to address model error during the forecast under the context of multiscale initial condition error sampling provided by the EnVar system. A total of 10 retrospective cases were used to explore the optimal design of convection-allowing ensemble forecasts. In addition to single-model single-physics (SMSP) configurations, ensemble forecast experiments compared multimodel (MM) and multiphysics (MP) approaches. Stochastic physics was also applied to MP for further comparison. Neighborhood-based verification of precipitation and composite reflectivity showed each of these model error techniques to be superior to SMSP configurations. Comparisons of MM and MP approaches had mixed findings. The MM approach had better overall skill in heavy-precipitation forecasts; however, MP ensembles had better skill for light (2.54 mm) precipitation and reduced ensemble mean error of other diagnostic fields, particularly near the surface. The MM experiment had the largest spread in precipitation, and for most hours in other fields; however, rank histograms and spaghetti contours showed significant clustering of the ensemble distribution. MP plus stochastic physics was able to significantly increase spread with time to be competitive with MM by the end of the forecast. The results generally suggest that an MM approach is best for early forecast lead times up to 6–12 h, while a combination of MP and stochastic physics approaches is preferred for forecasts beyond 6–12 h.
  • Keywords:
  • Source:
    Monthly Weather Review, 148(3), 1177-1203
  • DOI:
  • ISSN:
    0027-0644;1520-0493;
  • Format:
    PDF
  • Publisher:
    American Meteorological Society
  • Document Type:
    Journal Article
  • Funding:
  • Rights Information:
    Other
  • Compliance:
    Library
  • Main Document Checksum:
  • Download URL:
  • File Type:

Supporting Files

  • No Additional Files
More +

You May Also Like

Checkout today's featured content at repository.library.noaa.gov

Version 3.27.1