• Ahijevych, D., , Gilleland E. , , Brown B. G. , , and Ebert E. E. , 2009: Application of spatial verification methods to idealized and NWP-gridded precipitation forecasts. Wea. Forecasting, 24 , 14851497.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Casati, B., and Coauthors, 2008: Forecast verification: Current status and future directions. Meteor. Appl., 15 , 318.

  • Davis, C. A., , Brown B. , , and Bullock R. , 2006: Object-based verification of precipitation forecasts. Part I: Methodology and application to mesoscale rain areas. Mon. Wea. Rev., 134 , 17721784.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Davis, C. A., , Brown B. , , Bullock R. , , and Halley-Gotway J. , 2009: The method for object-based diagnostic evaluation (MODE) applied to WRF forecasts from the 2005 SPC Spring Program. Wea. Forecasting, 24 , 12521267.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Ebert, E. E., 2008: Fuzzy verification of high-resolution gridded forecasts: A review and proposed framework. Meteor. Appl., 15 , 5164.

  • Ebert, E. E., , and McBride J. L. , 2000: Verification of precipitation in weather systems: Determination of systematic errors. J. Hydrol., 239 , 179202.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Früh, B., , Bendix J. , , Nauss T. , , Paulat M. , , Pfeiffer A. , , Schipper J. W. , , Thies B. , , and Wernli H. , 2007: Verification of precipitation from regional climate simulations and remote-sensing observations with respect to ground-based observations in the upper Danube catchment. Meteor. Z., 16 , 275293.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gilleland, E., , Ahijevych D. , , Brown B. G. , , Casati B. , , and Ebert E. E. , 2009: Intercomparison of spatial forecast verification methods. Wea. Forecasting, 24 , 14161430.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hofmann, C., , Zimmer M. , , and Wernli H. , 2009: A brief catalog of poor and excellent COSMO model QPFs in German river catchments. Institut für Physik der Atmosphäre Internal Rep. 2, Universität Mainz, 31 pp. [Available online at http://www.staff.uni-mainz.de/zimmerm/catalogpoorexcellent.pdf].

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Jenkner, J., 2008: Stratified verifications of quantitative precipitation forecasts over Switzerland. Ph.D. thesis, ETH Zurich 17782, 98 pp.

  • Jolliffe, I. T., , and Stephenson D. B. , 2003: Forecast Verification: A Practitioner’s Guide in Atmospheric Science. Wiley and Sons, 240 pp.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kain, J. S., and Coauthors, 2008: Some practical considerations regarding horizontal resolution in the first generation of operational convection-allowing NWP. Wea. Forecasting, 23 , 931952.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Paulat, M., 2007: Verifikation der Niederschlagsvorhersage für Deutschland von 2001–2004. Ph.D. thesis, University of Mainz, 155 pp.

  • Rossa, A. M., , Nurmi P. , , and Ebert E. E. , 2008: Overview of methods for the verification of quantitative precipitation forecasts. Precipitation: Advances in Measurement, Estimation and Prediction, S. C. Michaelides, Ed., Springer, 418–450.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wernli, H., , Paulat M. , , Hagen M. , , and Frei C. , 2008: SAL—A novel quality measure for the verification of quantitative precipitation forecasts. Mon. Wea. Rev., 136 , 44704487.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Zimmer, M., , and Wernli H. , 2008: COPS Atlas–The meteorological situation from June 1 till August 31, 2007. Institut für Physik der Atmosphäre Internal Rep. 1, Universität Mainz, 100 pp. [Available online at http://www.staff.uni-mainz.de/zimmerm/atlascops.pdf].

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Zimmer, M., , Wernli H. , , Frei C. , , and Hagen M. , 2008: Feature-based verification of deterministic precipitation forecasts with SAL during COPS. Proc. MAP D-PHASE Scientific Meeting, Bologna, Italy, Istituto di Scienze dell’Atmosfera e del Clima–Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche (ISAC–CNR), 116–121. [Available online at http://www.smr.arpa.emr.it/dphase-cost/].

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 115 115 21
PDF Downloads 84 84 21

Spatial Forecast Verification Methods Intercomparison Project: Application of the SAL Technique

View More View Less
  • 1 Institute for Atmospheric Physics, University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany
© Get Permissions
Restricted access

Abstract

In this study, a recently introduced feature-based quality measure called SAL, which provides information about the structure, amplitude, and location of a quantitative precipitation forecast (QPF) in a prespecified domain, is applied to different sets of synthetic and realistic QPFs in the United States. The focus is on a detailed discussion of selected cases and on the comparison of the verification results obtained with SAL and some classical gridpoint-based error measures. For simple geometric precipitation objects it is shown that SAL adequately captures errors in the size and location of the objects, however, not in their orientation. The artificially modified (so-called fake) cases illustrate that SAL has the potential to distinguish between forecasts where intense precipitation objects are either isolated or embedded in a larger-scale low-intensity precipitation area. The real cases highlight that a quality assessment with SAL can lead to contrasting results compared to the application of classical error measures and that, overall, SAL provides useful guidance for identifying the specific shortcomings of a particular QPF. It is also discussed that verification results with SAL and other error measures should be interpreted with care if considering large domains, which may contain meteorologically distinct precipitation systems.

Corresponding author address: Heini Wernli, Institute for Atmospheric Physics, University of Mainz, Becherweg 21, D-55099 Mainz, Germany. Email: wernli@uni-mainz.de

This article included in the Spatial Forecast Verification Methods Inter-Comparison Project (ICP) special collection.

Abstract

In this study, a recently introduced feature-based quality measure called SAL, which provides information about the structure, amplitude, and location of a quantitative precipitation forecast (QPF) in a prespecified domain, is applied to different sets of synthetic and realistic QPFs in the United States. The focus is on a detailed discussion of selected cases and on the comparison of the verification results obtained with SAL and some classical gridpoint-based error measures. For simple geometric precipitation objects it is shown that SAL adequately captures errors in the size and location of the objects, however, not in their orientation. The artificially modified (so-called fake) cases illustrate that SAL has the potential to distinguish between forecasts where intense precipitation objects are either isolated or embedded in a larger-scale low-intensity precipitation area. The real cases highlight that a quality assessment with SAL can lead to contrasting results compared to the application of classical error measures and that, overall, SAL provides useful guidance for identifying the specific shortcomings of a particular QPF. It is also discussed that verification results with SAL and other error measures should be interpreted with care if considering large domains, which may contain meteorologically distinct precipitation systems.

Corresponding author address: Heini Wernli, Institute for Atmospheric Physics, University of Mainz, Becherweg 21, D-55099 Mainz, Germany. Email: wernli@uni-mainz.de

This article included in the Spatial Forecast Verification Methods Inter-Comparison Project (ICP) special collection.

Save