Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for :

  • Author or Editor: Christoph C. Raible x
  • Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society x
  • Refine by Access: Content accessible to me x
Clear All Modify Search
Joaquim G. Pinto
,
Florian Pantillon
,
Patrick Ludwig
,
Madeleine-Sophie Déroche
,
Giovanni Leoncini
,
Christoph C. Raible
,
Len C. Shaffrey
, and
David B. Stephenson
Full access
Urs Neu
,
Mirseid G. Akperov
,
Nina Bellenbaum
,
Rasmus Benestad
,
Richard Blender
,
Rodrigo Caballero
,
Angela Cocozza
,
Helen F. Dacre
,
Yang Feng
,
Klaus Fraedrich
,
Jens Grieger
,
Sergey Gulev
,
John Hanley
,
Tim Hewson
,
Masaru Inatsu
,
Kevin Keay
,
Sarah F. Kew
,
Ina Kindem
,
Gregor C. Leckebusch
,
Margarida L. R. Liberato
,
Piero Lionello
,
Igor I. Mokhov
,
Joaquim G. Pinto
,
Christoph C. Raible
,
Marco Reale
,
Irina Rudeva
,
Mareike Schuster
,
Ian Simmonds
,
Mark Sinclair
,
Michael Sprenger
,
Natalia D. Tilinina
,
Isabel F. Trigo
,
Sven Ulbrich
,
Uwe Ulbrich
,
Xiaolan L. Wang
, and
Heini Wernli

The variability of results from different automated methods of detection and tracking of extratropical cyclones is assessed in order to identify uncertainties related to the choice of method. Fifteen international teams applied their own algorithms to the same dataset—the period 1989–2009 of interim European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) Re-Analysis (ERAInterim) data. This experiment is part of the community project Intercomparison of Mid Latitude Storm Diagnostics (IMILAST; see www.proclim.ch/imilast/index.html). The spread of results for cyclone frequency, intensity, life cycle, and track location is presented to illustrate the impact of using different methods. Globally, methods agree well for geographical distribution in large oceanic regions, interannual variability of cyclone numbers, geographical patterns of strong trends, and distribution shape for many life cycle characteristics. In contrast, the largest disparities exist for the total numbers of cyclones, the detection of weak cyclones, and distribution in some densely populated regions. Consistency between methods is better for strong cyclones than for shallow ones. Two case studies of relatively large, intense cyclones reveal that the identification of the most intense part of the life cycle of these events is robust between methods, but considerable differences exist during the development and the dissolution phases.

Full access