Abstract
As the need for regional reanalyses emerged around the world, a short period of the East Asia Regional Reanalysis (EARR) system was recently developed based on the Unified Model (UM). In this study, the quality of the EARR is evaluated by comparing the short-range precipitation reforecasts against reforecasts of ERA-Interim (ERA-I) reanalysis and operational forecasts of the Korea Meteorological Administration (OPER). For the verification, two different periods are selected for 14 days in the summer (July 2013, denoted as 201307) and winter (February 2014, denoted as 201402). The equitable threat score (ETS) of EARR and OPER is generally greater than that of ERA-I. The frequency bias index (FBI) of EARR and OPER is overall closer to 1 than that of ERA-I for all thresholds, which indicates that EARR and OPER are much closer to the observation compared to ERA-I. For the period 201307, the ERA-I FBI is greater than 1 for lower thresholds and the probability of detection (POD) and false alarm ratio (FAR) of ERA-I are high, implying that ERA-I tends to overforecast light precipitation. In addition, using the same Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) Model, the 6-h precipitation forecasts are integrated every 12 h (initialized from 0000/1200 UTC) for 4 months for the summer and winter season. Although the differences of ETS and FBI between EARR and ERA-I are not distinct for the summer season, overall EARR ETS is higher than ERA-I ETS, and EARR FBI is closer to 1 than ERA-I FBI. Based on several evaluations, the precipitation reforecasts of EARR are confirmed to be more accurate than those of OPER and ERA-I in East Asia.
© 2019 American Meteorological Society. For information regarding reuse of this content and general copyright information, consult the AMS Copyright Policy (www.ametsoc.org/PUBSReuseLicenses).
