Jumpiness in ensemble forecasts of Atlantic tropical cyclone tracks

IF 3 3区 地球科学 Q2 METEOROLOGY & ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES
David S. Richardson, H. Cloke, John A. Methven, F. Pappenberger
{"title":"Jumpiness in ensemble forecasts of Atlantic tropical cyclone tracks","authors":"David S. Richardson, H. Cloke, John A. Methven, F. Pappenberger","doi":"10.1175/waf-d-23-0113.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nWe investigate the run-to-run consistency (jumpiness) of ensemble forecasts of tropical cyclone tracks from three global centers: ECMWF, the Met Office and NCEP. We use a divergence function to quantify the change in cross-track position between consecutive ensemble forecasts initialized at 12-hour intervals. Results for the 2019-2021 North Atlantic hurricane season show that the jumpiness varied substantially between cases and centers, with no common cause across the different ensemble systems. Recent upgrades to the Met Office and NCEP ensembles reduced their overall jumpiness to match that of the ECMWF ensemble. The average divergence over the set of cases provides an objective measure of the expected change in cross-track position from one forecast to the next. For example, a user should expect on average that the ensemble mean position will change by around 80-90 km in the cross-track direction between a forecast for 120 hours ahead and the updated forecast made 12 hours later for the same valid time. This quantitative information can support users’ decision making, for example in deciding whether to act now or wait for the next forecast. We did not find any link between jumpiness and skill, indicating that users should not rely on the consistency between successive forecasts as a measure of confidence. Instead, we suggest that users should use ensemble spread and probabilistic information to assess forecast uncertainty, and consider multi-model combinations to reduce the effects of jumpiness.","PeriodicalId":49369,"journal":{"name":"Weather and Forecasting","volume":"155 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-13","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-23-0113.1","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

Abstract

We investigate the run-to-run consistency (jumpiness) of ensemble forecasts of tropical cyclone tracks from three global centers: ECMWF, the Met Office and NCEP. We use a divergence function to quantify the change in cross-track position between consecutive ensemble forecasts initialized at 12-hour intervals. Results for the 2019-2021 North Atlantic hurricane season show that the jumpiness varied substantially between cases and centers, with no common cause across the different ensemble systems. Recent upgrades to the Met Office and NCEP ensembles reduced their overall jumpiness to match that of the ECMWF ensemble. The average divergence over the set of cases provides an objective measure of the expected change in cross-track position from one forecast to the next. For example, a user should expect on average that the ensemble mean position will change by around 80-90 km in the cross-track direction between a forecast for 120 hours ahead and the updated forecast made 12 hours later for the same valid time. This quantitative information can support users’ decision making, for example in deciding whether to act now or wait for the next forecast. We did not find any link between jumpiness and skill, indicating that users should not rely on the consistency between successive forecasts as a measure of confidence. Instead, we suggest that users should use ensemble spread and probabilistic information to assess forecast uncertainty, and consider multi-model combinations to reduce the effects of jumpiness.
大西洋热带气旋路径集合预报的跳跃性
我们研究了来自三个全球中心的热带气旋路径集合预报的运行间一致性(跳跃性):ECMWF、气象局和 NCEP。我们使用发散函数来量化以 12 小时间隔初始化的连续集合预报之间的交叉路径位置变化。2019-2021年北大西洋飓风季节的结果表明,不同情况和中心之间的跳跃性差异很大,不同集合系统之间没有共同的原因。最近对气象局和 NCEP 集合的升级降低了其整体跳跃性,使其与 ECMWF 集合相匹配。案例集的平均偏离度提供了一个客观指标,用于衡量从一个预报到下一个预报的横道位置的预期变化。例如,用户应平均预期,在同一有效时间内,120 小时前的预报与 12 小时后的更新预报之间,集合平均位置将在横轨方向上变化约 80-90 公里。这些定量信息可以帮助用户做出决策,例如决定是现在行动还是等待下一次预报。我们没有发现跳跃性和技能之间有任何联系,这表明用户不应依赖连续预报之间的一致性来衡量信心。相反,我们建议用户使用集合传播和概率信息来评估预测的不确定性,并考虑多模式组合来减少跳跃性的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Weather and Forecasting
Weather and Forecasting 地学-气象与大气科学
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
17.20%
发文量
131
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
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.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信