Editorial Type:
Article
Article Type:
Research Article

A Nonsymmetric Logit Model and Grouped Predictand Category Development

Bob Glahn NOAA/National Weather Service/Office of Science and Technology/Meteorological Development Laboratory, Silver Spring, Maryland

Search for other papers by Bob Glahn in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
Print Publication:
01 Aug 2014
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-13-00300.1
Page(s):
2991–3002
Restricted access

Abstract

Logistic regression is an alternative to regression estimation of event probabilities (REEP) and other techniques for estimating weather event probabilities based on NWP output or other predictors. Logistic regression has the advantage over REEP in that the probability estimates are constrained between zero and unity, whereas REEP can “overshoot” these values. It may be a detriment in some applications that the curves developed, one for each of several predictand categories (events), are symmetric. This paper shows how the logit curve can easily be made nonsymmetric as a function of a predictor, and thereby possibly achieve a better fit to the data. As with REEP, the probabilities estimated by logistic regression for each of several categories of a variable may not be consistent. For instance, the probability of snow > 2 in. may exceed the probability of snow > 1 in. Such inconsistencies can be avoided by developing a single equation involving all predictand categories and including another predictor that is a function of the predictand. This effectively, for a single predictor, produces parallel curves separated along the predictor axis but imposes restrictions on the equations and probabilities produced from them. The relationship between the predictor(s) and the predictand must be considered in determining the functional form. With only one predictor, defining the function is relatively straightforward. However, with multiple predictors, the process is more problematic. This paper demonstrates an alternative to imposing a functional form by using binary predictors. This formulation also achieves the goal of producing consistent forecasts and generalizes more readily to multiple predictors.

Corresponding author address: Bob Glahn, Scientist Emeritus, Meteorological Development Laboratory, NOAA/NWS, 1325 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. E-mail: harry.glahn@noaa.gov

Abstract

Logistic regression is an alternative to regression estimation of event probabilities (REEP) and other techniques for estimating weather event probabilities based on NWP output or other predictors. Logistic regression has the advantage over REEP in that the probability estimates are constrained between zero and unity, whereas REEP can “overshoot” these values. It may be a detriment in some applications that the curves developed, one for each of several predictand categories (events), are symmetric. This paper shows how the logit curve can easily be made nonsymmetric as a function of a predictor, and thereby possibly achieve a better fit to the data. As with REEP, the probabilities estimated by logistic regression for each of several categories of a variable may not be consistent. For instance, the probability of snow > 2 in. may exceed the probability of snow > 1 in. Such inconsistencies can be avoided by developing a single equation involving all predictand categories and including another predictor that is a function of the predictand. This effectively, for a single predictor, produces parallel curves separated along the predictor axis but imposes restrictions on the equations and probabilities produced from them. The relationship between the predictor(s) and the predictand must be considered in determining the functional form. With only one predictor, defining the function is relatively straightforward. However, with multiple predictors, the process is more problematic. This paper demonstrates an alternative to imposing a functional form by using binary predictors. This formulation also achieves the goal of producing consistent forecasts and generalizes more readily to multiple predictors.

Corresponding author address: Bob Glahn, Scientist Emeritus, Meteorological Development Laboratory, NOAA/NWS, 1325 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. E-mail: harry.glahn@noaa.gov
Save
Cover Monthly Weather Review
Monthly Weather Review

  • Agresti, A., 2002: Categorical Data Analysis. 2nd ed. Wiley-Interscience, 710 pp.

  • Antolik, M. S., 2000: An overview of the National Weather Service’s centralized statistical quantitative precipitation forecasts. J. Hydrol., 239, 306–337, doi:10.1016/S0022-1694(00)00361-9.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Bartlett, M. S., 1937: Some examples of statistical methods of research in agriculture and applied biology. J. Roy. Stat. Soc., 4 (Suppl.), 137–183.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Bentzien, S., and P. Friederichs, 2012: Generating and calibrating probabilistic quantitative precipitation forecasts from the high-resolution NWP model COSMO-DE. Wea. Forecasting, 27, 988–1002, doi:10.1175/WAF-D-11-00101.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Berkson, J., 1944: Application of the logistic function to bio-assay. J. Amer. Stat. Assoc., 39, 357–365.

  • Brier, G. W., 1950: Verification of forecasts expressed in terms of probability. Mon. Wea. Rev., 78, 1–3, doi:10.1175/1520-0493(1950)078<0001:VOFEIT>2.0.CO;2.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Charba, J. P., and F. G. Samplatsky, 2009a: Hi-res gridded MOS 6-h QPF guidance. 23rd Conf. on Weather Analysis and Forecasting/19th Conf. on Numerical Weather Prediction, Omaha, NE, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 17B2. [Available online at https://ams.confex.com/ams/23WAF19NWP/techprogram/paper_154176.htm.]

  • Charba, J. P., and F. G. Samplatsky, 2009b: Operational 2-h thunderstorm guidance forecasts to 24 hours on a 20-km grid. 23rd Conf. on Weather Analysis and Forecasting/19th Conf. on Numerical Weather Prediction, Omaha, NE, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 15B5. [Available online at https://ams.confex.com/ams/23WAF19NWP/techprogram/paper_154173.htm.]

  • Charba, J. P., and F. G. Samplatsky, 2011: High-resolution GFS-based MOS quantitative precipitation forecasts on a 4-km grid. Mon. Wea. Rev., 139, 39–68, doi:10.1175/2010MWR3224.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Charba, J. P., F. G. Samplatsky, and P. E. Shaffer, 2011: Experimental LAMP 2-h convection guidance forecasts on a 20-km grid. 24th Conf. on Weather Analysis and Forecasting/20th Conf. on Numerical Weather Prediction, Seattle, WA, Amer. Meteor. Soc., J19.3. [Available online at https://ams.confex.com/ams/91Annual/webprogram/Paper177705.html.]

  • Cosgrove, R. L., and B. Sfanos, 2004: Producing MOS snowfall amounts from Cooperative Observer reports. 20th Conf. on Weather Analysis and Forecasting/16th Conf. on Numerical Weather Prediction, Seattle, WA, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 6.3. [Available online at https://ams.confex.com/ams/84Annual/techprogram/paper_69445.htm.]

  • Dallavalle, J. P., J. S. Jensenius, and W. H. Klein, 1980: Improved surface temperature guidance from the limited-area fine mesh model. Preprints, Eighth Conf. on Weather Forecasting and Analysis, Denver, CO, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 2–8.

  • Ghirardelli, J. E., and B. Glahn, 2010: The Meteorological Development Laboratory’s Aviation Weather Prediction System. Wea. Forecasting, 25, 1027–1051, doi:10.1175/2010WAF2222312.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Glahn, B., 2013: Statistics in hydrometeorological forecasting—Contributions and challenges. Symp. on the Role of Statistical Methods in Weather and Climate Prediction, Austin, TX, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 1.1. [Available online at https://ams.confex.com/ams/93Annual/webprogram/Paper223374.html.]

  • Glahn, B., M. Peroutka, J. Weidenfeld, J. Wagner, G. Zylstra, and B. Schuknecht, 2009: MOS uncertainty estimates in an ensemble framework. Mon. Wea. Rev., 137, 246–268, doi:10.1175/2008MWR2569.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Hamill, T. M., J. S. Whitaker, and X. Wei, 2004: Ensemble reforecasting: Improving medium-range forecast skill using retrospective forecasts. Mon. Wea. Rev., 132, 1434–1447, doi:10.1175/1520-0493(2004)132<1434:ERIMFS>2.0.CO;2.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Kleiber, W., A. E. Raftery, J. Baars, T. Gneiting, C. F. Mass, and E. Grimit, 2011: Locally calibrated probabilistic temperature forecasting using geostatistical model averaging and local Bayesian model averaging. Mon. Wea. Rev., 139, 2630–2649, doi:10.1175/2010MWR3511.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Livezey, R. E., K. Y. Vinnikov, M. M. Timofeyeva, R. Tinker, and H. M. Van den Dool, 2007: Estimation and extrapolation of climate normals and climatic trends. J. Appl. Meteor. Climatol., 46, 1759–1776, doi:10.1175/2007JAMC1666.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Lorenz, E. N., 1959: Prospects for statistical forecasting. Final Rep., Statistical Forecasting Project, Contract AF 19 (604)-1566, Dept. of Meteorology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 185 pp.

  • Miller, R. G., 1968: Regression estimation of event probabilities. U.S. Weather Bureau Contract Cwb-10704, Tech. Rep. 1, The Travelers Research Center, Inc., 153 pp.

  • Neter, J., and W. Wasserman, 1974: Applied Linear Statistical Models. Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 842 pp.

  • Palko, J. M., J. S. Jensenius Jr., and J. P. Dallavalle, 1985: Development of medium range forecast equations for maximum/minimum temperature and probability of precipitation. TDL Office Note 85-7, National Weather Service, NOAA, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14 pp. [Available online at http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/noaa_documents/NWS/TDL_office_note/85-7.pdf.]

  • Roulin, E., and S. Vannitsem, 2012: Postprocessing of ensemble precipitation predictions with extended logistic regression based on hindcasts. Mon. Wea. Rev.,140, 874–888, doi:10.1175/MWR-D-11-00062.1; Corrigendum, 140, 2018, doi:10.1175/MWR-D-12-00061.1.

  • Shaffer, P. E., 2010: Logit transforms in forecasting precipitation type. 20th Conf. on Probability and Statistics in the Atmospheric Sciences, Atlanta, GA, Amer. Meteor. Soc., P222. [Available online at https://ams.confex.com/ams/90annual/techprogram/paper_158479.htm.]

  • Shaffer, P. E., and K. Gilbert, 2008: Developing GFS-based MOS thunderstorm guidance for Alaska. Third Conf. on Meteorological Applications of Lighting Data, New Orleans, LA, Amer. Meteor. Soc., P2.9. [Available online at https://ams.confex.com/ams/88Annual/techprogram/paper_131190.htm.]

  • Sloughter, J. M., A. E. Rafterey, T. Gneiting, and C. Fraley, 2007: Probabilistic quantitative precipitation forecasting using Bayesian model averaging. Mon. Wea. Rev., 135, 3209–3220, doi:10.1175/MWR3441.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Stidd, C. K., 1953: Cube-root-normal precipitation distributions. Trans. Amer. Geophys. Union,34, 31–35.

  • Walker, S. H., and D. B. Duncan, 1967: Estimation of the probability of an event as a function of several independent variables. Biometrika, 54, 167–179, doi:10.1093/biomet/54.1-2.167.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Wilks, D. S., 2009: Extending logistic regression to provide full-probability-distribution MOS forecasts. Meteor. Appl., 16, 361–368, doi:10.1002/met.134.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Wilks, D. S., 2011: Statistical Methods in the Atmospheric Sciences. International Geophysics Series, Vol. 100, Academic Press, 676 pp.

  • Wilson, L. J., and M. Vallee, 2002: The Canadian Updateable Model Output Statistics (UMOS) system: Design and development tests. Wea. Forecasting, 17, 206–222, doi:10.1175/1520-0434(2002)017<0206:TCUMOS>2.0.CO;2.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 2722 2502 1260
PDF Downloads 151 46 1