跨尺度降水预报的一般综合评估方法

IF 4 3区 地球科学 Q1 GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Geoscientific Model Development Pub Date : 2024-06-10 DOI:10.5194/gmd-17-4579-2024
Bing Zhang, Mingjian Zeng, Anning Huang, Zhengkun Qin, Couhua Liu, Wenru Shi, Xin Li, Kefeng Zhu, Chun-Lai Gu, Jialing Zhou
{"title":"跨尺度降水预报的一般综合评估方法","authors":"Bing Zhang, Mingjian Zeng, Anning Huang, Zhengkun Qin, Couhua Liu, Wenru Shi, Xin Li, Kefeng Zhu, Chun-Lai Gu, Jialing Zhou","doi":"10.5194/gmd-17-4579-2024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. With the development of refined numerical forecasts, problems such as score distortion due to the division of precipitation thresholds in both traditional and improved scoring methods for precipitation forecasts and the increasing subjective risk arising from the scale setting of the neighborhood spatial verification method have become increasingly prominent. To address these issues, a general comprehensive evaluation method (GCEM) is developed for cross-scale precipitation forecasts by directly analyzing the proximity of precipitation forecasts and observations in this study. In addition to the core indicator of the precipitation accuracy score (PAS), the GCEM system also includes score indices for insufficient precipitation forecasts, excessive precipitation forecasts, precipitation forecast biases, and clear/rainy forecasts. The PAS does not distinguish the magnitude of precipitation and does not delimit the area of influence; it constitutes a fair scoring formula with objective performance and can be suitable for evaluating rainfall events such as general and extreme precipitation. The PAS can be used to calculate the accuracy of numerical models or quantitative precipitation forecasts, enabling the quantitative evaluation of the comprehensive capability of various refined precipitation forecasting products. Based on the GCEM, comparative experiments between the PAS and threat score (TS) are conducted for two typical precipitation weather processes. The results show that relative to the TS, the PAS better aligns with subjective expectations, indicating that the PAS is more reasonable than the TS. In the case of an extreme-precipitation event in Henan, China, two high-resolution models were evaluated using the PAS, TS, and fraction skill score (FSS), verifying the evaluation ability of PAS scoring for predicting extreme-precipitation events. In addition, other indices of the GCEM are utilized to analyze the range and extent of both insufficient and excessive forecasts of precipitation, as well as the precipitation forecasting ability for different weather processes. These indices not only provide overall scores similar to those of the TS for individual cases but also support two-dimensional score distribution plots which can comprehensively reflect the performance and characteristics of precipitation forecasts. Both theoretical and practical applications demonstrate that the GCEM exhibits distinct advantages and potential promotion and application value compared to the various mainstream precipitation forecast verification methods.\n","PeriodicalId":12799,"journal":{"name":"Geoscientific Model Development","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A general comprehensive evaluation method for cross-scale precipitation forecasts\",\"authors\":\"Bing Zhang, Mingjian Zeng, Anning Huang, Zhengkun Qin, Couhua Liu, Wenru Shi, Xin Li, Kefeng Zhu, Chun-Lai Gu, Jialing Zhou\",\"doi\":\"10.5194/gmd-17-4579-2024\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract. With the development of refined numerical forecasts, problems such as score distortion due to the division of precipitation thresholds in both traditional and improved scoring methods for precipitation forecasts and the increasing subjective risk arising from the scale setting of the neighborhood spatial verification method have become increasingly prominent. To address these issues, a general comprehensive evaluation method (GCEM) is developed for cross-scale precipitation forecasts by directly analyzing the proximity of precipitation forecasts and observations in this study. In addition to the core indicator of the precipitation accuracy score (PAS), the GCEM system also includes score indices for insufficient precipitation forecasts, excessive precipitation forecasts, precipitation forecast biases, and clear/rainy forecasts. The PAS does not distinguish the magnitude of precipitation and does not delimit the area of influence; it constitutes a fair scoring formula with objective performance and can be suitable for evaluating rainfall events such as general and extreme precipitation. The PAS can be used to calculate the accuracy of numerical models or quantitative precipitation forecasts, enabling the quantitative evaluation of the comprehensive capability of various refined precipitation forecasting products. Based on the GCEM, comparative experiments between the PAS and threat score (TS) are conducted for two typical precipitation weather processes. The results show that relative to the TS, the PAS better aligns with subjective expectations, indicating that the PAS is more reasonable than the TS. In the case of an extreme-precipitation event in Henan, China, two high-resolution models were evaluated using the PAS, TS, and fraction skill score (FSS), verifying the evaluation ability of PAS scoring for predicting extreme-precipitation events. In addition, other indices of the GCEM are utilized to analyze the range and extent of both insufficient and excessive forecasts of precipitation, as well as the precipitation forecasting ability for different weather processes. These indices not only provide overall scores similar to those of the TS for individual cases but also support two-dimensional score distribution plots which can comprehensively reflect the performance and characteristics of precipitation forecasts. Both theoretical and practical applications demonstrate that the GCEM exhibits distinct advantages and potential promotion and application value compared to the various mainstream precipitation forecast verification methods.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":12799,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Geoscientific Model Development\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Geoscientific Model Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4579-2024\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geoscientific Model Development","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4579-2024","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要随着精细化数值预报的发展,传统的降水预报评分方法和改进的降水预报评分方法中由于降水阈值划分导致的评分失真、邻域空间验证方法的尺度设置导致的主观风险增大等问题日益突出。针对这些问题,本研究通过直接分析降水预报与观测资料的接近程度,建立了跨尺度降水预报的一般综合评价方法(GCEM)。除了降水准确性评分(PAS)这一核心指标外,GCEM 系统还包括降水预报不足、降水预报过多、降水预报偏差和晴雨预报等评分指标。PAS 不区分降水量的大小,也不划定影响范围;它是一个具有客观性能的公平评分公式,适用于评估一般降水和极端降水等降水事件。PAS 可用于计算数值模式或定量降水预报的准确性,从而对各种精细化降水预报产品的综合能力进行定量评估。在 GCEM 的基础上,针对两种典型的降水天气过程进行了 PAS 和威胁评分(TS)的对比实验。结果表明,相对于 TS,PAS 更符合主观预期,表明 PAS 比 TS 更合理。以中国河南的一次极端降水事件为例,利用 PAS、TS 和分数技能得分(FSS)对两个高分辨率模型进行了评估,验证了 PAS 评分对预测极端降水事件的评估能力。此外,还利用 GCEM 的其他指数分析了降水预报不足和过度的范围和程度,以及不同天气过程的降水预报能力。这些指数不仅提供了与 TS 指数类似的单个案例的总体评分,而且支持二维评分分布图,能够全面反映降水预报的性能和特点。理论和实际应用均表明,与各种主流降水预报验证方法相比,GCEM具有明显的优势和潜在的推广应用价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A general comprehensive evaluation method for cross-scale precipitation forecasts
Abstract. With the development of refined numerical forecasts, problems such as score distortion due to the division of precipitation thresholds in both traditional and improved scoring methods for precipitation forecasts and the increasing subjective risk arising from the scale setting of the neighborhood spatial verification method have become increasingly prominent. To address these issues, a general comprehensive evaluation method (GCEM) is developed for cross-scale precipitation forecasts by directly analyzing the proximity of precipitation forecasts and observations in this study. In addition to the core indicator of the precipitation accuracy score (PAS), the GCEM system also includes score indices for insufficient precipitation forecasts, excessive precipitation forecasts, precipitation forecast biases, and clear/rainy forecasts. The PAS does not distinguish the magnitude of precipitation and does not delimit the area of influence; it constitutes a fair scoring formula with objective performance and can be suitable for evaluating rainfall events such as general and extreme precipitation. The PAS can be used to calculate the accuracy of numerical models or quantitative precipitation forecasts, enabling the quantitative evaluation of the comprehensive capability of various refined precipitation forecasting products. Based on the GCEM, comparative experiments between the PAS and threat score (TS) are conducted for two typical precipitation weather processes. The results show that relative to the TS, the PAS better aligns with subjective expectations, indicating that the PAS is more reasonable than the TS. In the case of an extreme-precipitation event in Henan, China, two high-resolution models were evaluated using the PAS, TS, and fraction skill score (FSS), verifying the evaluation ability of PAS scoring for predicting extreme-precipitation events. In addition, other indices of the GCEM are utilized to analyze the range and extent of both insufficient and excessive forecasts of precipitation, as well as the precipitation forecasting ability for different weather processes. These indices not only provide overall scores similar to those of the TS for individual cases but also support two-dimensional score distribution plots which can comprehensively reflect the performance and characteristics of precipitation forecasts. Both theoretical and practical applications demonstrate that the GCEM exhibits distinct advantages and potential promotion and application value compared to the various mainstream precipitation forecast verification methods.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Geoscientific Model Development
Geoscientific Model Development GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
9.80%
发文量
352
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Geoscientific Model Development (GMD) is an international scientific journal dedicated to the publication and public discussion of the description, development, and evaluation of numerical models of the Earth system and its components. The following manuscript types can be considered for peer-reviewed publication: * geoscientific model descriptions, from statistical models to box models to GCMs; * development and technical papers, describing developments such as new parameterizations or technical aspects of running models such as the reproducibility of results; * new methods for assessment of models, including work on developing new metrics for assessing model performance and novel ways of comparing model results with observational data; * papers describing new standard experiments for assessing model performance or novel ways of comparing model results with observational data; * model experiment descriptions, including experimental details and project protocols; * full evaluations of previously published models.
期刊最新文献
Multivariate adjustment of drizzle bias using machine learning in European climate projections Incorporating Oxygen Isotopes of Oxidized Reactive Nitrogen in the Regional Atmospheric Chemistry Mechanism, version 2 (ICOIN-RACM2) Dynamic ecosystem assembly and escaping the “fire trap” in the tropics: insights from FATES_15.0.0 StraitFlux – precise computations of water strait fluxes on various modeling grids Development and evaluation of the interactive Model for Air Pollution and Land Ecosystems (iMAPLE) version 1.0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1