Calibration of medium-range metocean forecasts for the North Sea

IF 4.3 2区 工程技术 Q1 ENGINEERING, OCEAN
Conor Murphy , Ross Towe , Philip Jonathan
{"title":"Calibration of medium-range metocean forecasts for the North Sea","authors":"Conor Murphy ,&nbsp;Ross Towe ,&nbsp;Philip Jonathan","doi":"10.1016/j.apor.2025.104538","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>We assess the value of calibrating forecast models for significant wave height <span><math><msub><mrow><mi>H</mi></mrow><mrow><mi>S</mi></mrow></msub></math></span>, wind speed <span><math><mi>W</mi></math></span> and mean spectral wave period <span><math><msub><mrow><mi>T</mi></mrow><mrow><mi>m</mi></mrow></msub></math></span> for forecast horizons between zero and 168 h from a commercial forecast provider, to improve forecast performance for a location in the central North Sea. We consider two straightforward calibration models, linear regression (LR) and non-homogeneous Gaussian regression (NHGR), incorporating deterministic, control and ensemble mean forecast covariates. We show that relatively simple calibration models (with at most three covariates) provide good calibration and that addition of further covariates cannot be justified. Optimal calibration models (for the forecast mean of a physical quantity) always make use of the deterministic forecast and ensemble mean forecast for the same quantity, together with a covariate associated with a different physical quantity. The selection of optimal covariates is performed independently per forecast horizon, and the set of optimal covariates shows a large degree of consistency across forecast horizons. As a result, it is possible to specify a consistent model to calibrate a given physical quantity, incorporating a common set of three covariates for all horizons. For NHGR models of a given physical quantity, the ensemble forecast standard deviation for that quantity is skilful in predicting forecast error standard deviation, strikingly so for <span><math><msub><mrow><mi>H</mi></mrow><mrow><mi>S</mi></mrow></msub></math></span>. We show that the consistent LR and NHGR calibration models facilitate reduction in forecast bias to near zero for all of <span><math><msub><mrow><mi>H</mi></mrow><mrow><mi>S</mi></mrow></msub></math></span>, <span><math><mi>W</mi></math></span> and <span><math><msub><mrow><mi>T</mi></mrow><mrow><mi>m</mi></mrow></msub></math></span>, and that there is little difference between LR and NHGR calibration for the mean. Both LR and NHGR models facilitate reduction in forecast error standard deviation relative to naive adoption of the (uncalibrated) deterministic forecast, with NHGR providing somewhat better performance. Distributions of standardised residuals from NHGR are generally more similar to a standard Gaussian than those from LR.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":8261,"journal":{"name":"Applied Ocean Research","volume":"158 ","pages":"Article 104538"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Ocean Research","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0141118725001269","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, OCEAN","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We assess the value of calibrating forecast models for significant wave height HS, wind speed W and mean spectral wave period Tm for forecast horizons between zero and 168 h from a commercial forecast provider, to improve forecast performance for a location in the central North Sea. We consider two straightforward calibration models, linear regression (LR) and non-homogeneous Gaussian regression (NHGR), incorporating deterministic, control and ensemble mean forecast covariates. We show that relatively simple calibration models (with at most three covariates) provide good calibration and that addition of further covariates cannot be justified. Optimal calibration models (for the forecast mean of a physical quantity) always make use of the deterministic forecast and ensemble mean forecast for the same quantity, together with a covariate associated with a different physical quantity. The selection of optimal covariates is performed independently per forecast horizon, and the set of optimal covariates shows a large degree of consistency across forecast horizons. As a result, it is possible to specify a consistent model to calibrate a given physical quantity, incorporating a common set of three covariates for all horizons. For NHGR models of a given physical quantity, the ensemble forecast standard deviation for that quantity is skilful in predicting forecast error standard deviation, strikingly so for HS. We show that the consistent LR and NHGR calibration models facilitate reduction in forecast bias to near zero for all of HS, W and Tm, and that there is little difference between LR and NHGR calibration for the mean. Both LR and NHGR models facilitate reduction in forecast error standard deviation relative to naive adoption of the (uncalibrated) deterministic forecast, with NHGR providing somewhat better performance. Distributions of standardised residuals from NHGR are generally more similar to a standard Gaussian than those from LR.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Applied Ocean Research
Applied Ocean Research 地学-工程:大洋
CiteScore
8.70
自引率
7.00%
发文量
316
审稿时长
59 days
期刊介绍: The aim of Applied Ocean Research is to encourage the submission of papers that advance the state of knowledge in a range of topics relevant to ocean engineering.
×
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