Application of Weighted Analog Intensity Prediction (WAIP) guidance on Philippine tropical cyclone events

IF 0.8 4区 地球科学 Q4 GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Robb P. Gile, John Carlo S. Sugui, Juanito S. Galang, E. Cayanan, Hsiao-Chung Tsai, Yung-Lan Lin, Ai-Mei Chia, Ping-Yu Lin, Kuo-Chen Lu, B. Jou
{"title":"Application of Weighted Analog Intensity Prediction (WAIP) guidance on Philippine tropical cyclone events","authors":"Robb P. Gile, John Carlo S. Sugui, Juanito S. Galang, E. Cayanan, Hsiao-Chung Tsai, Yung-Lan Lin, Ai-Mei Chia, Ping-Yu Lin, Kuo-Chen Lu, B. Jou","doi":"10.3319/tao.2021.03.03.01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The tropical cyclone (TC) intensity forecast from the Weighted Analog Intensity Prediction (WAIP) was evaluated using 63 Philippine TC cases from 2014 to 2017 to determine its applicability as baseline intensity forecast guidance of the Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration (PAGASA). The method generates a rank-weighted average of intensity evolutions of 10 historical analogs from the 1945 to 2014 Joint Typhoon Warning Center best tracks that closely resemble the PAGASA official forecast track and initial intensity at the time the forecast is generated. WAIP proved to be more skillful in providing intensity forecast at 12 to 96 h and less skillful at 120 h relative to persistence. Verification revealed that WAIP had significantly smaller mean absolute error and consistently smaller intensity biases up to 96 h. However, the small sample size at 96 h due to the limitations in the extent of the observed track and reference track forecast from PAGASA suggests that the result may not fully represent the model performance within the Philippine Area of Responsibility at 96 h. The probability distribution of intensities at 36, 72, and 96 h predicted by the model showed that the statistical model may not fully capture the full range of the observed intensities or the extreme values, with the model struggling to predict lower range of intensity values with increasing forecast intervals. Three TC cases are presented to emphasize the model dependence on the accuracy of the reference track forecast and the number and representativeness of available historical analogs for a particular forecast scenario.","PeriodicalId":22259,"journal":{"name":"Terrestrial, Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Terrestrial, Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3319/tao.2021.03.03.01","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The tropical cyclone (TC) intensity forecast from the Weighted Analog Intensity Prediction (WAIP) was evaluated using 63 Philippine TC cases from 2014 to 2017 to determine its applicability as baseline intensity forecast guidance of the Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration (PAGASA). The method generates a rank-weighted average of intensity evolutions of 10 historical analogs from the 1945 to 2014 Joint Typhoon Warning Center best tracks that closely resemble the PAGASA official forecast track and initial intensity at the time the forecast is generated. WAIP proved to be more skillful in providing intensity forecast at 12 to 96 h and less skillful at 120 h relative to persistence. Verification revealed that WAIP had significantly smaller mean absolute error and consistently smaller intensity biases up to 96 h. However, the small sample size at 96 h due to the limitations in the extent of the observed track and reference track forecast from PAGASA suggests that the result may not fully represent the model performance within the Philippine Area of Responsibility at 96 h. The probability distribution of intensities at 36, 72, and 96 h predicted by the model showed that the statistical model may not fully capture the full range of the observed intensities or the extreme values, with the model struggling to predict lower range of intensity values with increasing forecast intervals. Three TC cases are presented to emphasize the model dependence on the accuracy of the reference track forecast and the number and representativeness of available historical analogs for a particular forecast scenario.
加权模拟强度预报(WAIP)在菲律宾热带气旋事件中的应用
利用2014 - 2017年菲律宾的63个热带气旋案例,对加权模拟强度预测(wap)的热带气旋强度预测进行了评估,以确定其作为菲律宾大气、地球物理和天文服务管理局(PAGASA)基线强度预测指南的适用性。该方法生成1945年至2014年联合台风预警中心最佳路径与PAGASA官方预报路径和预报生成时初始强度相似的10个历史类似物的强度演变排序加权平均值。相对于持续性而言,wap在12 ~ 96 h提供强度预报的能力更强,而在120 h提供强度预报的能力较差。验证表明,在96 h之前,WAIP的平均绝对误差明显较小,强度偏差也始终较小。然而,由于PAGASA观测轨迹和参考轨迹预测范围的限制,96 h时的样本量较小,这表明结果可能无法完全代表96 h时菲律宾责任区内的模型性能。模型预测的96 h表明,统计模型可能不能完全捕捉到观测强度的全部范围或极值,随着预测间隔的增加,模型难以预测较低范围的强度值。提出了三个TC案例,以强调模型对参考轨迹预测准确性的依赖,以及对特定预测情景的可用历史类似物的数量和代表性。
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
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
审稿时长
4.5 months
期刊介绍: The major publication of the Chinese Geoscience Union (located in Taipei) since 1990, the journal of Terrestrial, Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences (TAO) publishes bi-monthly scientific research articles, notes, correspondences and reviews in all disciplines of the Earth sciences. It is the amalgamation of the following journals: Papers in Meteorological Research (published by the Meteorological Society of the ROC) since Vol. 12, No. 2 Bulletin of Geophysics (published by the Institute of Geophysics, National Central University) since No. 27 Acta Oceanographica Taiwanica (published by the Institute of Oceanography, National Taiwan University) since Vol. 42.
×
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