dot
Detailansicht
Katalogkarte GBA
Katalogkarte ISBD
Suche präzisieren
Drucken
Download RIS
Hier klicken, um den Treffer aus der Auswahl zu entfernen
Titel Verification and comparison of probabilistic precipitation forecasts using the TIGGE data in the upriver of Huaihe Basin
VerfasserIn L.-N. Zhao, F.-Y. Tian, H. Wu, D. Qi, J.-Y. Di, Z. Wang
Medientyp Artikel
Sprache Englisch
ISSN 1680-7340
Digitales Dokument URL
Erschienen In: Towards practical applications in ensemble hydro-meteorological forecasting ; Nr. 29 (2011-03-04), S.95-102
Datensatznummer 250016939
Publikation (Nr.) Volltext-Dokument vorhandencopernicus.org/adgeo-29-95-2011.pdf
 
Zusammenfassung
The precipitation forecasts of three ensemble prediction systems (EPS) and two multi-model ensemble prediction systems (MM EPS) were assessed by comparing with observations from 19 rain gauge stations located in the Dapoling-Wangjiaba sub-catchment of Huaihe Basin for the period from 1 July to 6 August 2008. The sample Probabilistic Distribution Functions (PDF) of gamma distribution, the Relative Operating Characteristic (ROC) diagrams, the percentile precipitation and a heavy rainfall event are analyzed to evaluate the performances of the single and multi-model ensemble prediction system (EPS).

The three EPS were from the China Meteorological Administration (CMA); the United States National Centre for Environment Predictions (NCEP); and the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF), all were obtained from the TIGGE-CMA archiving centre (THORPEX Interactive Grand Global Ensemble, TIGGE). The MM EPS were created using the equal weighting method for every ensemble member over the test area, the first ( MM-1) consisted of all three EPS, the second (MM-2) consisted of the ECMWF and NCEP EPS.

The results demonstrate the level of correspondence between deterioration in predictive skill and extended lead time. Compared with observations and with a lead time of one day, ECMWF performs a little better than other centre's. With over five days in advance, all the three EPS and the two MM EPS don't give reliable probabilistic precipitation forecasts. Both MM EPS can outperform CMA and NCEP for most of the forecasted days, but still perform a little worse than ECMWF. Though variation of daily percentile precipitation and ROC areas show MM-2 outperforms MM-1, gamma distribution indicates much similar performances for all 10-day forecast, and neither is superior to ECMWF.
 
Teil von