...
首页> 外文期刊>Weather and forecasting >Evaluation of Cool-Season Extratropical Cyclones in a Multimodel Ensemble for Eastern North America and the Western Atlantic Ocean
【24h】

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

机译:浅谈北美洲和西部大西洋多模型集合中凉爽季节鞋面旋风的评价

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

This 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.
机译:本文评估了三个运营全球集合中的卓越旋风[20人成员加拿大气象中心(CMC),20人的环境预测中心(NCEP),50名欧洲中等地区天气预报中心(ECMWF) ]。在美国ECMWF的ERA-Interim数据集中,在美国东部和西部大西洋东部和西部大西洋中评估了一天 - 0-6的预测。 Hodges Cyclone跟踪方案用于使用6-H平均海平压(MSLP)数据来跟踪旋风分离器。对于小于72小时的铅,NCEP和ECMWF集合在旋风强度和轨道上具有可比的平均绝对误差,而CMC误差较大。 4-6天ECMWF分别具有12-18和24-30小时,比NCEP和CMC分别比NCEP强度更高。所有合奏都在媒体范围内具有相对深的旋风,在海湾流附近有一个区域。 CMC,NCEP和ECMWF都具有慢速轨道偏差,从24到90小时显着,并且它们具有120至144小时的左轨道偏差。 ECMWF具有比CMC和NCEP的强度和轨道更大的概率技能,而90构件多模型集合(NCEP + CMC + ECMWF)具有比任何单个集合更高的概率技能。在中等范围期间,与ECMWF(5.6%,5.2%和4.1%)和NCEP(13.7%)(13.7%),ECMWF + NCEP + CMC MultiModel集合体在信封外的最少情况(1.9%,1.8%和1.0%)(1.9%,5.2%和4.1%)(13.7%)用于旋风强度和跨轨道位置的10.6%和11.0%)。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号