Conditional verification of all COSMO countries: first results
-
Upload
kylynn-jones -
Category
Documents
-
view
28 -
download
2
description
Transcript of Conditional verification of all COSMO countries: first results
Federal Department of Home Affairs FDHAFederal Office of Meteorology and Climatology MeteoSwiss
Conditional verification of all COSMO countries:
first results
COSMO General Meeting, September 2012, Lugano
by the members of WG Verification
2 Conditional Verification | COSMO-GM 2012, LuganoVanessa Stauch, [email protected]
Objectives of conditional verification
Contribute to COSMO model development
Improve the understanding of forecast errors
Identify possible sources of errors in COSMO
Contribute to guidelines on how to use COSMO forecasts
3 Conditional Verification | COSMO-GM 2012, LuganoVanessa Stauch, [email protected]
Feedback loop within COSMO
4 Conditional Verification | COSMO-GM 2012, LuganoVanessa Stauch, [email protected]
Common conditional verification results
T2M for overcast conditions T2M for clear sky conditions
Spring 2012, ME and RMSE for many COSMO modelsAutumn 2011, ME and RMSE for many COSMO models
RMSE
ME
• Cloud cover clearly stratifies the COSMO forecast error of T2M (no matter which diagnostic)
• Under observed clear sky conditions, the mean error has a pronounced daily cycle:
All models underestimate daytime T2M and overestimate nighttime T2M
• Under observed overcast conditions, this behaviour is not observed
5 Conditional Verification | COSMO-GM 2012, LuganoVanessa Stauch, [email protected]
Searching for clues…
• Additional stratification to look at cases with stable boundary layer → distinguish between dynamical and radiation dominated processes
COSMO-ME Conditional Verification T2m when observed TCC ≤ 25%
COSMO-ME Conditional Verification T2m when observed TCC ≤ 25% & wind speed ≤ 2 m/s
COSMO-7 Conditional Verification T2m when forecast TCC ≤ 25%
COSMO-7 Conditional Verification T2m when forecast TCC ≤ 25% & wind speed ≤ 2.5 m/s
10 Conditional Verification | COSMO-GM 2012, LuganoVanessa Stauch, [email protected]
Searching for clues…
• Additional stratification to look at cases with stable boundary layer → distinguish between dynamical and radiation dominated processes
→ in calm wind conditions, the underestimation of the daily temperature amplitude is even more pronounced→ overestimated thermal mixing (minimal diffusion coefficient?)
Nighttime overestimation from insufficient radiative cooling? Thermal conductivity of the soil?
Daytime underestimation from underestimated sensible heat flux? Impact of soil moisture?
11 Conditional Verification | COSMO-GM 2012, LuganoVanessa Stauch, [email protected]
T2M with fcst soil moisture condition
ME, RMSE dry conditions
ME, RMSE wet conditions
ME, RMSE no conditions
Similar systematic error properties as for cloud cover conditions, but phase slightly shifted and different data sample → new box opened…
WG5 COSMO General Meeting, Lugano 2012
Overestimation of preci amount for lower thresholds in high CAPE cases and ETS a bit
reduced
FBI
ETS
Unstable (CAPE>=50J/kg) Stable (CAPE<50J/kg)
Precipitation with CAPE conditions
13 Conditional Verification | COSMO-GM 2012, LuganoVanessa Stauch, [email protected]
Precipitation with CAPE conditions
FBI
ETS
Unstable (CAPE>=50J/kg) Stable (CAPE<50J/kg)
14 Conditional Verification | COSMO-GM 2012, LuganoVanessa Stauch, [email protected]
Precipitation with CAPE
FBI
ETS
Unstable (CAPE>=50J/kg) Stable (CAPE<50J/kg)
Higher performance (in terms of ETS, also POD) in stable conditions, but CAPE condition displaced
→ find appropriate time period, other condition
15 Conditional Verification | COSMO-GM 2012, LuganoVanessa Stauch, [email protected]
Conclusions
Conditional verification provides us with tools for analysing rather complex COSMO model errors
Use of intensive measurement sites (e.g. sensible and latent fluxes for clear sky temperature error, soil moisture for temperature and dewpoint error) and radiosoundings
Identify suitable stratifications for precipitation (e.g. appropriate time integrations for CAPE or convective time scale, so far no success with weather classes)
Tight interaction with WG3 and others
16 Conditional Verification | COSMO-GM 2012, LuganoVanessa Stauch, [email protected]
CAPE>50
CAPE<50
Very high POD values for unstable conditions, FAR not
so differentWG5 COSMO General Meeting, Lugano 2012
2mT, Td with dry or wet soil conditions
WG5 COSMO General Meeting, Lugano 2012
W_SO Water content of first soil layer(kg/m2) 1cm.
Td: Higher error in dry soil and larger underestimation2mT: Higher error in wet soil and larger understimation
Winter SpringFall
Winter SpringFall
19 Conditional Verification | COSMO-GM 2012, LuganoVanessa Stauch, [email protected]
TD2M with soil moisture condition
ME, RMSE dry conditions
ME, RMSE wet conditions
ME, RMSE no conditions
20 Conditional Verification | COSMO-GM 2012, LuganoVanessa Stauch, [email protected]
FF10M with grid point height
ME, RMSE all stations
ME, RMSE gp height > 800m
ME, RMSE gp height < 800m
21 Conditional Verification | COSMO-GM 2012, LuganoVanessa Stauch, [email protected]
FF10M scatter plot
Winter 2012