当前位置: X-MOL 学术J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Evaluation of Three Numerical Weather Prediction Models for the Weddell Sea Region for the Austral Winter 2013
Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres ( IF 3.8 ) Pub Date : 2020-12-19 , DOI: 10.1029/2020jd033389
M. O. Jonassen 1, 2 , T. Nygård 3 , T. Vihma 1, 3
Affiliation  

It is widely recognized that numerical weather prediction (NWP) results for the Antarctic are relatively poor compared to the mid‐latitudes. In this study, we evaluate output from three operational NWP systems: the ECMWF, Global Forecast System (GFS) and Antarctic Mesoscale Prediction System (AMPS), for the Austral winter (June‐August) of 2013 for the Weddell Sea region, paying special attention to regional patterns of error statistics. This is the first evaluation of NWP systems over the Southern Ocean that also addresses the accuracy of forecasted vertical profiles. In the evaluation, we use data from land‐ and ship‐based automatic weather stations (AWS) and radiosoundings. While the ECMWF and AMPS forecasts are on average biased cold and dry near the surface, the GFS forecasts are on average biased warm and moist. The near‐surface wind speed is on average overestimated by the AMPS forecasts, whereas it is slightly underestimated by the forecasts of the other two NWP systems. Among the variables investigated, all three NWP systems forecast the near‐surface specific humidity most accurately, followed by the temperature and then the wind speed. The forecast quality for the near‐surface and upper‐air wind speed degrades the most rapidly with increasing lead time, compared to the other variables. ECMWF is the overall best NWP system when compared against both the near‐surface and upper‐air observations, followed by AMPS and then GFS. The generally poorest model performance is found in locations with complex terrain along the coast of the Antarctic continent, and the best over the ocean.

中文翻译:

威德尔海地区2013年冬季冬季三种数值天气预报模型的评估

众所周知,与中纬度相比,南极的数值天气预报(NWP)结果相对较差。在这项研究中,我们评估了韦德尔海地区2013年南方冬季(6月至8月)的三个运行NWP系统的输出:ECMWF,全球预报系统(GFS)和南极中尺度预报系统(AMPS)。注意错误统计的区域模式。这是对南大洋NWP系统的首次评估,该评估还解决了预测垂直剖面的准确性。在评估中,我们使用陆基和船基自动气象站(AWS)和无线电探测的数据。ECMWF和AMPS预报平均偏向地表干冷,而GFS预报平均偏向温暖和湿润。AMPS的预报平均高估了近地表风速,而另两个NWP系统的预报却略低了近地表风速。在所研究的变量中,所有三个NWP系统都最准确地预测了近地表特定湿度,其次是温度,然后是风速。与其他变量相比,随着提前期的增加,近地表和高空风速的预测质量下降最快。与近地和高空观测相比,ECMWF是总体最佳的NWP系统,其次是AMPS,然后是GFS。在南极大陆沿海地形复杂,海洋最佳的地区,发现模型性能通常最差。而其他两个NWP系统的预测则略低了它。在所研究的变量中,所有三个NWP系统都最准确地预测了近地表特定湿度,其次是温度,然后是风速。与其他变量相比,随着提前期的增加,近地表和高空风速的预测质量下降最快。与近地和高空观测相比,ECMWF是总体最佳的NWP系统,其次是AMPS,然后是GFS。在南极大陆沿海地形复杂,海洋最佳的地区,发现模型性能通常最差。而其他两个NWP系统的预测则略低了它。在所研究的变量中,所有三个NWP系统都最准确地预测了近地表特定湿度,其次是温度,然后是风速。与其他变量相比,随着提前期的增加,近地表和高空风速的预测质量下降最快。与近地和高空观测相比,ECMWF是总体最佳的NWP系统,其次是AMPS,然后是GFS。在南极大陆沿海地形复杂,海洋最佳的地区,发现模型性能通常最差。这三个NWP系统都最准确地预测了近地表的特定湿度,其次是温度,然后是风速。与其他变量相比,随着提前期的增加,近地表和高空风速的预测质量下降最快。与近地和高空观测相比,ECMWF是总体最佳的NWP系统,其次是AMPS,然后是GFS。在南极大陆沿海地形复杂,海洋最佳的地区,发现模型性能通常最差。这三个NWP系统都最准确地预测了近地表的特定湿度,其次是温度,然后是风速。与其他变量相比,随着提前期的增加,近地表和高空风速的预测质量下降最快。与近地和高空观测相比,ECMWF是总体最佳的NWP系统,其次是AMPS,然后是GFS。在南极大陆沿海地形复杂,海洋最佳的地区,发现模型性能通常最差。与近地和高空观测相比,ECMWF是总体最佳的NWP系统,其次是AMPS,然后是GFS。在南极大陆沿海地形复杂,海洋最佳的地区,发现模型性能通常最差。与近地和高空观测相比,ECMWF是总体最佳的NWP系统,其次是AMPS,然后是GFS。在南极大陆沿海地形复杂,海洋最佳的地区,发现模型性能通常最差。
更新日期:2021-01-25
down
wechat
bug