Temple R. Lee, Sandip Pal, Ronald D. Leeper, Tim Wilson, Howard J. Diamond, Tilden P. Meyers, David D. Turner
{"title":"利用高分辨率快速刷新(HRRR)模式证明特定区域评估对数值天气预报模式的重要性","authors":"Temple R. Lee, Sandip Pal, Ronald D. Leeper, Tim Wilson, Howard J. Diamond, Tilden P. Meyers, David D. Turner","doi":"10.1175/waf-d-23-0177.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThe scientific literature has many studies evaluating numerical weather prediction (NWP) models. However, many of those studies averaged across a myriad of different atmospheric conditions and surface forcings which can obfuscate the atmospheric conditions when NWP models perform well versus when they perform inadequately. To help isolate these different scenarios, we used observations from the U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN) obtained between 1 January and 31 December 2021 to distinguish among different near-surface atmospheric conditions (i.e., different near-surface heating rates (), incoming shortwave radiation (SWd) regimes, and 5-cm soil moisture (SM05)) to evaluate the High-Resolution Rapid Refresh (HRRR) model, which is a 3-km model used for operational weather forecasting in the U.S. On days with small (large) , we found afternoon T biases of about 2°C (−1°C) and afternoon SWd biases of up to 170 W m−2 (100 W m−2), but negligible impacts on SM05 biases. On days with small (large) SWd, we found daytime temperature biases of about 3°C (−2.5°C) and daytime SWd biases of up to 190 W m−2 (80 W m−2). Whereas different SM05 had little impact on T and SWd biases, dry (wet) conditions had positive (negative) SM05 biases. We argue that the proper evaluation of weather forecasting models requires careful consideration of different near-surface atmospheric conditions and is critical to better identifying model deficiencies which supports improvements to the parameterization schemes used therein. A similar, regime-specific model verification approach may also be used to help evaluate other geophysical models.","PeriodicalId":49369,"journal":{"name":"Weather and Forecasting","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On the Importance of Regime-Specific Evaluations for Numerical Weather Prediction Models as Demonstrated using the High Resolution Rapid Refresh (HRRR) Model\",\"authors\":\"Temple R. Lee, Sandip Pal, Ronald D. Leeper, Tim Wilson, Howard J. Diamond, Tilden P. Meyers, David D. Turner\",\"doi\":\"10.1175/waf-d-23-0177.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nThe scientific literature has many studies evaluating numerical weather prediction (NWP) models. However, many of those studies averaged across a myriad of different atmospheric conditions and surface forcings which can obfuscate the atmospheric conditions when NWP models perform well versus when they perform inadequately. To help isolate these different scenarios, we used observations from the U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN) obtained between 1 January and 31 December 2021 to distinguish among different near-surface atmospheric conditions (i.e., different near-surface heating rates (), incoming shortwave radiation (SWd) regimes, and 5-cm soil moisture (SM05)) to evaluate the High-Resolution Rapid Refresh (HRRR) model, which is a 3-km model used for operational weather forecasting in the U.S. On days with small (large) , we found afternoon T biases of about 2°C (−1°C) and afternoon SWd biases of up to 170 W m−2 (100 W m−2), but negligible impacts on SM05 biases. On days with small (large) SWd, we found daytime temperature biases of about 3°C (−2.5°C) and daytime SWd biases of up to 190 W m−2 (80 W m−2). Whereas different SM05 had little impact on T and SWd biases, dry (wet) conditions had positive (negative) SM05 biases. We argue that the proper evaluation of weather forecasting models requires careful consideration of different near-surface atmospheric conditions and is critical to better identifying model deficiencies which supports improvements to the parameterization schemes used therein. A similar, regime-specific model verification approach may also be used to help evaluate other geophysical models.\",\"PeriodicalId\":49369,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Weather and Forecasting\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Weather and Forecasting\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1175/waf-d-23-0177.1\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"METEOROLOGY & ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Weather and Forecasting","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1175/waf-d-23-0177.1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"METEOROLOGY & ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
科学文献中有许多评估数值天气预报(NWP)模式的研究。然而,这些研究中的许多研究都是对无数不同的大气条件和表面作用力进行平均的,这可能会混淆数值天气预报模式表现良好时与表现不佳时的大气条件。为了帮助区分这些不同的情况,我们使用了 2021 年 1 月 1 日至 12 月 31 日期间从美国气候参考网络(USCRN)获得的观测数据,以区分不同的近地面大气条件(即在短波辐射较小(较大)的日子里,我们发现午后 T 偏差约为 2°C(-1°C),午后短波辐射偏差高达 170 W m-2(100 W m-2),但对 SM05 偏差的影响可忽略不计。在 SWd 较小(较大)的日子里,我们发现白天温度偏差约为 3°C (-2.5°C),白天 SWd 偏差高达 190 W m-2 (80 W m-2)。不同的 SM05 对气温和 SWd 偏差影响不大,而干燥(潮湿)条件下的 SM05 偏差为正(负)。我们认为,对天气预报模式的正确评估需要仔细考虑不同的近地面大气条件,这对更好地识别模式的缺陷至关重要,有助于改进其中使用的参数化方案。类似的、针对特定区域的模型验证方法也可用于帮助评估其他地球物理模型。
On the Importance of Regime-Specific Evaluations for Numerical Weather Prediction Models as Demonstrated using the High Resolution Rapid Refresh (HRRR) Model
The scientific literature has many studies evaluating numerical weather prediction (NWP) models. However, many of those studies averaged across a myriad of different atmospheric conditions and surface forcings which can obfuscate the atmospheric conditions when NWP models perform well versus when they perform inadequately. To help isolate these different scenarios, we used observations from the U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN) obtained between 1 January and 31 December 2021 to distinguish among different near-surface atmospheric conditions (i.e., different near-surface heating rates (), incoming shortwave radiation (SWd) regimes, and 5-cm soil moisture (SM05)) to evaluate the High-Resolution Rapid Refresh (HRRR) model, which is a 3-km model used for operational weather forecasting in the U.S. On days with small (large) , we found afternoon T biases of about 2°C (−1°C) and afternoon SWd biases of up to 170 W m−2 (100 W m−2), but negligible impacts on SM05 biases. On days with small (large) SWd, we found daytime temperature biases of about 3°C (−2.5°C) and daytime SWd biases of up to 190 W m−2 (80 W m−2). Whereas different SM05 had little impact on T and SWd biases, dry (wet) conditions had positive (negative) SM05 biases. We argue that the proper evaluation of weather forecasting models requires careful consideration of different near-surface atmospheric conditions and is critical to better identifying model deficiencies which supports improvements to the parameterization schemes used therein. A similar, regime-specific model verification approach may also be used to help evaluate other geophysical models.
期刊介绍:
Weather and Forecasting (WAF) (ISSN: 0882-8156; eISSN: 1520-0434) publishes research that is relevant to operational forecasting. This includes papers on significant weather events, forecasting techniques, forecast verification, model parameterizations, data assimilation, model ensembles, statistical postprocessing techniques, the transfer of research results to the forecasting community, and the societal use and value of forecasts. The scope of WAF includes research relevant to forecast lead times ranging from short-term “nowcasts” through seasonal time scales out to approximately two years.