1. Introduction
Near-surface winds exert a significant influence on surface exchanges of energy, momentum, and mass, and the associated kinetic energy represents a resource of potentially global importance. Recent years have seen a rapid increase in the number of studies examining the predictability of near-surface winds (e.g., Lange and Focken 2005; Costa et al. 2008; Gneiting et al. 2008; Klausner et al. 2009; Ma et al. 2009; Soman et al. 2010; Thorarinsdottir and Gneiting 2010; Giebel et al. 2011; Pinson 2012; Schuhen et al. 2012; Sloughter et al. 2013). Wind prediction models may be entirely empirical, based on statistical relationships, or they may be dynamical, making use of physically based equations of motion. A third class of hybrid models uses statistical postprocessing to correct errors in local wind predictions from dynamical models. Although a primary focus of this research has been wind energy prediction, the prediction of near-surface winds is important for a much broader range of applications (e.g., modeling pollutant transport, assessing the risks of extreme winds to transport or the built environment, or computing surface fluxes).
While a number of studies have addressed direct predictions of wind speed, relatively little attention has been paid to the predictability of speed relative to vector wind components. While the wind speed is of most direct interest for many applications, the vector winds contain information about both speed and direction. As the joint distribution of vector wind components is more closely Gaussian than that of speed and direction, it has the practical advantage (relative to the joint distribution of speed and direction) of being amenable to the use of classical statistical predictive tools. Consideration of the vector wind components also allows for a more direct connection to dynamical models in which the equations of motion are normally expressed in terms of the vector winds rather than the speed and direction.
This study considers relationships between the predictability of vector wind components and that of wind speed. Exact knowledge of the vector wind components of course provides exact knowledge of the speed. What is less clear is the extent to which wind speed variations are predictable when variability in the vector wind components is only imperfectly predicted. In particular, the focus of this study is the statistical prediction of surface vector wind components and wind speed from Gaussian predictors. Such predictors may be individual physical quantities or linear combinations of a number of these (as in a multiple linear regression). For example, in the context of statistical downscaling, a predictor may result from a linear regression model based on a number of large-scale free-atmospheric circulation indices (which may involve physical quantities other than winds) as in Monahan (2012a). The results that will be obtained are insensitive to whether there is a time lag between predictor and predictand (i.e., for a statistical forecast model) or if the predictor and predictand are simultaneous (i.e., for a “nowcast”). All that is assumed about the predictors is that they are Gaussian.

Kernel density estimate (e.g., Silverman 1986) of the spatial probability density function of observed correlations between w and w2. The observed sea surface winds are taken from the SeaWinds scatterometer observations, between 60°S and 60°N.
Citation: Journal of Climate 26, 15; 10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00424.1
Kernel density estimate of the spatial joint distributions of correlations between vector wind components, wind speed and squared wind speed: (left) corr(U, w) and corr(U, w2) and (right) corr(V, w) and corr(V, w2). Correlations are computed from SeaWinds observations between 60°S and 60°N.
Citation: Journal of Climate 26, 15; 10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00424.1
This study addresses differences in predictability of vector wind components and wind speed inherent to the mathematical relationship between these quantities. As such, we will consider an idealized setting in which all statistical features of the vector winds and wind speeds are assumed to be known. In this case, any prediction biases can be corrected and terms I and II in the mean squared error expansion Eq. (11) can be eliminated by rescaling the mean and standard deviation of the predicted wind speeds to match the known true values. The remaining irreducible errors are associated with imperfect correlations between prediction and predictand. Correlations are a standard skill measures for deterministic predictions and will be the focus of the present analysis. This idealized setting represents a best-case scenario of statistical prediction with Gaussian predictors, in a stationary setting with known statistics.
As the simplest example of the relationship between linear predictive skills of the vector wind components and wind speed, our primary focus will be the prediction of wind speed for the case in which variability in the vector wind components is uncorrelated and isotropic: σu = συ = σ and r = 0. This situation is a good first approximation to vector wind variability across much of the World Ocean (e.g., Monahan 2007). In fact, the assumption of uncorrelated, isotropic variability is not necessary; the results of a more general analysis are presented in appendix A.
We will successively consider the following three different prediction scenarios:
The direct prediction of w from a single Gaussian predictor, for which it will be shown that the predictability of w is always bounded above by at least one vector wind component (section 2).
The prediction of w from predictions of the components u and υ using a single Gaussian predictor. Although predictions of w are shown to improve, we will find that the correlation-based wind speed predictability is still bounded above by that of at least one vector wind component. Furthermore, predictive skill is generally reduced when the variance of the (imperfectly predicted) components is inflated to offset a low variance bias (section 3).
The prediction of w from predictions of u and υ using separate Gaussian predictors. In this case, the predictability of speed is generally (but not always) bounded above by that of the best-predicted vector wind component, and inflation of component variances can in some circumstances improve the quality of the wind speed prediction (section 4).
2. Direct prediction of w with a single Gaussian predictor
To obtain an analytic expression for the correlation-based predictive skill of w in terms of that of the components, we will adopt the following strategy: knowing the statistics of u and υ (



3. Prediction of w from components with a single Gaussian predictor
The previous section considered the direct prediction of wind speed from a Gaussian predictor. As wind speed is a non-Gaussian quantity, the potentially poor performance of Gaussian predictors is not surprising. In contrast, the vector wind components have been assumed to be Gaussian, so perhaps w is better predicted by first predicting the components u and υ by x and then combining these into a wind speed prediction. The following analysis will demonstrate that this is fact the case.







We see that, from the perspective of correlation-based predictive skill, for a single Gaussian predictor it is always better to first predict u and υ and then compute w, rather than predict w directly (insofar as the vector winds are Gaussian). For correlated, anisotropic vector winds, we also find that wind speed predictions are improved by first predicting the components. Interestingly, in this more general situation there is a small parameter range over which speeds are slightly better predicted than the components (appendix A), but it must be emphasized that this range is very small.

4. Prediction of wind speed from components: Separate predictions of u and υ
In the previous analyses, we assumed that a single predictor x was available for predictions of u, υ, and w. In fact, if u and υ are to be separately predicted through, for example, statistical downscaling, then distinct predictors will be obtained for each of these. The resulting predictive skills of u and υ will therefore be better than (or at least no worse than) those obtained with the single predictor x, but how much better will the predictions of w constructed from these component predictions be? We will now demonstrate that, although for the majority of parameter values the predictive skill of w is bounded above by that of the components, this is not true in all circumstances. Furthermore, there are situations in which predictions of w are improved by correcting for the variance biases in up and υp before constructing wp, although these are still a minority of cases and these predictive skills are still generally bounded above by those of the vector wind components. Finally, predictions of observed sea surface winds will be used to demonstrate that, despite the strong assumptions that have been made about the distribution of vector winds, the results of this analysis are in good agreement with empirically determined, correlation-based wind speed predictive skills.


Black curve: probability density function of the ratio Γ between the wind speed prediction skill (for wp constructed from separate predictions of u and υ) and that of the better predicted of the along- or across-mean vector wind components [Eq. (51)], obtained from uniform sampling of the parameter values over the ranges 0 ≤ ρ11, ρ12 ≤ 1, −1 ≤ ρ12, ρ21 ≤ 1, and
Citation: Journal of Climate 26, 15; 10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00424.1


(left) Probability distribution of A [Eq. (54)] obtained by sampling the parameter values uniformly over the range 0 ≤ ρ11, ρ22 ≤ 1, −1 ≤ ρ12, ρ21 ≤ 1, and
Citation: Journal of Climate 26, 15; 10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00424.1



Kernel density estimate of the relationship between the observed wind speed predictability corr(wp, w) and the theoretical value from Eq. (50). The vector wind predictors up and υp were obtained from Eqs. (56)–(59) with ρ = 0.25 (black contours), ρ = 0.5 (red contours), and ρ = 0.75 (blue contours).
Citation: Journal of Climate 26, 15; 10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00424.1
The results of the theoretical model are not perfect: in particular, it predicts larger values of corr(wp, w) than are observed. A potential contributor to this bias is the fact that, in contradiction to the assumptions underlying the model, variability in the vector wind components is not Gaussian (e.g., Monahan 2004, 2006). Furthermore, as up and υp are themselves constructed from the non-Gaussian u and υ, these predictions themselves will be non-Gaussian. That the non-Gaussianity of the vector winds is an important factor in biasing the theoretical value of corr(wp, w) is demonstrated by consideration of the spatial joint distribution of this bias with the skewness of the along-mean wind component (Fig. 6). To a first approximation, this bias varies linearly with the vector wind skewness. Note that, for ρ = 0.5 and particularly for ρ = 0.75, there are nonzero offsets in the bias of corr(wp, w) for skew(u) ≃ 0. These offsets demonstrate that the model bias is affected by factors other than non-Gaussianity of the vector winds.
Kernel density estimates of the spatial joint distribution of the bias (theoretical value less observed value) in corr(wp, w) with the observed skewness of the along-mean wind component of the vector winds.
Citation: Journal of Climate 26, 15; 10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00424.1
More extensive empirical investigations of the predictability of vector wind components relative to wind speed predicted directly are presented for land surface winds over Canada in Culver and Monahan (2013) and for sea surface winds in Sun and Monahan (2013). Linear regression models with large-scale free-tropospheric predictors were used in these studies to predict variations in the statistics of surface winds from surface meteorological stations and buoys. The fully cross-validated empirical wind speed predictive skills found in these studies are in good agreement with the theoretical results presented here.
5. Conclusions
This study has considered the Gaussian statistical predictability of wind speed variations relative to that of the vector wind components. Analytic expressions for the correlation-based linear prediction skill of wind speed have been obtained, based on the assumption that vector wind variations can be approximated as bivariate Gaussian. The following main results have been obtained:
For any Gaussian predictor x, there will be at least one vector wind component that is better predicted than the wind speed. The predictability of the wind speed relative to the best-predicted component decreases as vector wind variations become much larger than the mean vector wind. In the limit that the mean vector wind vanishes, x carries no direct linear predictive information about w irrespective of how well the vector wind components are predicted.
Predictions of w are always improved, relative to predicting w from x directly, by first predicting the components u and υ from x and then constructing the predicted speed. In this approach, the predictive skill of w does not vanish in the limit that the mean vector wind goes to zero. For uncorrelated, isotropic vector wind variations, there will always be some vector wind component that is better predicted than wind speed (considerably so, in general). For correlated or anisotropic vector winds, the wind speed is better predicted than any vector component over a very small parameter region. Rescaling the predicted vector wind components to correct for the low variance bias always reduces the prediction skill of wind speeds.
Predicting the vector wind components separately rather than using a single predictor always results in an improved wind speed prediction. For isotropic and uncorrelated vector wind variations, it is possible through the use of separate predictions of u and υ to obtain wind speed predictions that are better than those of either the along- or across-mean vector wind component (for about 2% of the parameter sets). Furthermore, in this limit, it is possible to improve wind speed predictions by correcting for the variance biases of the predicted vector wind components, but these improvements do not result in an increase in the parameter range over which wind speeds are better predicted than the vector winds. For the great majority of parameter sets, it is the case that wind speed predictions are less skillful than those of vector winds.
The results of the theoretical analysis were broadly supported by predictions of sea surface vector winds in low and midlatitudes. Using vector wind predictions produced by corrupting observed vector wind time series with synthetic noise, it was found that wind speed prediction skills are generally less than those of the vector winds. The theoretical model predicts wind speed correlation skills that are somewhat larger than those that are observed. These biases were shown to be closely related to the skewness of the vector winds.
It may seem self-evident that the predictability of vector wind components should limit that of wind speed. However, one can imagine a situation in which the wind speed is perfectly predictable, while the wind direction has no predictability. In such a case, predictions of wind speed would be expected to be considerably better than those of any vector wind component. Such a scenario is ruled out by the results of the present study, for Gaussian vector winds and Gaussian predictors.
The analysis of observed winds in this study has indicated that skewness of the vector winds results in a small but systematic overestimate of wind speed predictability by the idealized model. Other non-Gaussian features of the vector wind component joint distribution, such as multimodality (e.g., Zhang et al. 2013), would also affect the accuracy of the model. A natural next step would be to extend the present analysis to account for the observed non-Gaussianity in u and υ; such a step is facilitated by the fact that the skewness of sea surface vector winds is a feature that is well understood (e.g., Monahan 2004, 2006). How best to specify a non-Gaussian distribution with given moments remains an open question (e.g., Monahan 2007). A possible approach would be to use a bivariate generalization of the Gram–Charlier expansion (e.g., Longuet-Higgins 1964; Lokas 1998); the resulting expressions for corr(wp, w) would be considerably more complicated than those obtained in the present study. It is important to emphasize that the bias in the modeled value of corr(wp, w) is systematically positive; that is, the idealized Gaussian model suggests higher values of wind speed predictability than are observed over the oceans. Thus, the upper bounds presented here for the Gaussian predictability of wind speeds relative to vector wind components are conservative.
As in Fig. 1, but for (left) the correlation between w2 and w1/2 and (right) the correlation between w2 and w3.
Citation: Journal of Climate 26, 15; 10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00424.1
The results of this study also relate to the prediction of any quantity which is the square root of the sum of squared Gaussians. In particular, if
The assumption that the bias terms I and II in Eq. (11) can be eliminated using known mean(w) and std(w) is a substantial simplification. In real prediction applications, nonstationarities or slow variations in these wind speed statistics will result in nonzero values for these bias terms. While these biases could potentially be minimized by determining mean(w) and std(w) over the recent past (rather than the whole record), weighted by a memory kernel (as in Pinson 2012), it cannot be expected that these biases will be exactly zero. By focusing on correlation-based measures of deterministic predictability, we have demonstrated the existence of limitations to the predictability of wind speed (relative to the vector wind components) even in the ideal limit when other biases can be neglected. An important direction of future study is the extension of this analysis to include these biases.
Furthermore, this study considers deterministic rather than ensemble predictions. The statistical postprocessing of ensemble predictions of surface vector winds and wind speeds is an emerging area of research which has seen considerable activity in recent years (e.g., Gneiting et al. 2008; Pinson 2012; Schuhen et al. 2012; Sloughter et al. 2013). Another important direction of future study would be to extend the present analysis to an ensemble prediction setting. In such a setting, correlation-based measures of predictive skill are not adequate, and predictability metrics appropriate to probabilistic forecasting must be used (e.g., Gneiting et al. 2008).
This study has focused on the statistical prediction of vector wind components and wind speed using Gaussian predictors, such as those characteristic of the large-scale flow used for statistical downscaling (e.g., Monahan 2012a). The limits to wind speed predictability that have been found could in principle be avoided through the use of non-Gaussian predictors. In particular, the results obtained in this study do not exclude the possibility that wind speed predictability can be increased through the use of appropriate nonlinear statistical tools, such as nonlinear regression, neural networks (e.g., Kretzschmar et al. 2004), or analog methods (e.g., Carter and Keislar 2000; Klausner et al. 2009). Furthermore, in principle excellent (non-Gaussian) predictors of u2 and υ2 could yield an excellent prediction of w2 without carrying any (linear) predictive information regarding u or υ. The limits to wind speed predictability obtained in this study apply only to the extent that the predictors are Gaussian.
Acknowledgments
The author gratefully acknowledges helpful comments on the manuscript from Charles Curry, Aaron Culver, and Cangjie Sun. The manuscript was also greatly improved by the thoughtful comments of three anonymous reviewers. This research was supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.
APPENDIX A
Prediction of Wind Speeds for Correlated, Anisotropic Vector Winds


Predictive skill of wind speeds constructed from predictions of u and υ obtained from a single Gaussian predictor, for correlated, anisotropic vector winds. The probability density function is of the ratio Γ between the modeled wind speed correlation prediction skill and that of the better predicted of the along- or across-mean vector wind component [Eq. (68)], uniformly sampled over the parameter ranges 0 ≤ ρu, ρυ ≤ 1, −1 ≤ r ≤ 1,
Citation: Journal of Climate 26, 15; 10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00424.1


APPENDIX B
Description of the SeaWinds Data
The surface wind dataset considered in this study consists of level 3.0 gridded SeaWinds scatterometer equivalent neutral 10-m zonal and meridional winds between 60°S and 60°N from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Quick Scatterometer (QuikSCAT) satellite (Perry 2001), available twice daily at a resolution of 0.25° × 0.25° from 19 July 1999 to 23 November 2009. These data are available for download from the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) Distributed Active Archive Center (http://podaac-www.jpl.nasa.gov/dataset/QSCAT_LEVEL_3). Those data points flagged as having been possibly corrupted by rain were excluded from the analysis. No further processing of the dataset was carried out.
REFERENCES
Brown, B. G., R. W. Katz, and A. H. Murphy, 1984: Time series models to simulate and forecast wind speed and wind power. J. Climate Appl. Meteor., 23, 1184–1195.
Carlin, J., and J. Haslett, 1982: The probability distribution of wind power from a dispersed array of wind turbine generators. J. Appl. Meteor., 21, 303–313.
Carter, R. G., and R. E. Keislar, 2000: Emergency response transport forecasting using historical wind field pattern matching. J. Appl. Meteor., 39, 446–462.
Costa, A., A. Crespo, J. Navarro, G. Lizcano, H. Madsen, and E. Feitosa, 2008: A review on the young history of the wind power short-term prediction. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev., 12, 1725–1744.
Culver, A. M., and A. H. Monahan, 2013: The statistical predictability of surface winds over western and central Canada. J. Climate, in press.
Giebel, G., R. Brownsword, G. Kariniotakis, M. Denhard, and C. Draxl, 2011: The state-of-the-art in short-term prediction of wind power: A literature overview. Anemos.Plus Tech. Rep., 110 pp. [Available online at http://www.prediktor.dk//publ/GGiebelEtAl-StateOfTheArtInShortTermPrediction_ANEMOSplus_2011.pdf.]
Gneiting, T., L. I. Stanberry, E. P. Grimit, L. Held, and N. A. Johnson, 2008: Assessing probabilistic forecasts of multivariate quantities, with an application to ensemble predictions of surface winds. Test, 17, 211–235.
Klausner, Z., H. Kaplan, and E. Fattal, 2009: The similar days method for predicting near surface wind vectors. Meteor. Appl., 16, 569–579.
Kretzschmar, R., P. Eckert, D. Cattani, and F. Eggimann, 2004: Neural network classifiers for local wind prediction. J. Appl. Meteor., 43, 727–738.
Lange, M., and U. Focken, 2005: Physical Approach to Short-Term Wind Power Prediction. Springer, 208 pp.
Lokas, E. L., 1998: Evolution of peaks in weakly non-linear density field and dark halo profiles. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., 296, 491–501.
Longuet-Higgins, M., 1964: Modified Gaussian distributions for slightly nonlinear variables. Radio Sci., 68D, 1049–1062.
Ma, L., L. Shiyan, J. Chuanwen, H. Liu, and Y. Zhang, 2009: A review on the forecasting of wind speed and generated power. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev., 13, 915–920.
Monahan, A. H., 2004: A simple model for the skewness of global sea-surface winds. J. Atmos. Sci., 61, 2037–2049.
Monahan, A. H., 2006: The probability distribution of sea surface wind speeds. Part I: Theory and SeaWinds observations. J. Climate, 19, 497–520.
Monahan, A. H., 2007: Empirical models of the probability distribution of sea surface wind speeds. J. Climate, 20, 5798–5814.
Monahan, A. H., 2012a: Can we see the wind? Statistical downscaling of historical sea surface winds in the northeast subarctic Pacific. J. Climate, 25, 1511–1528.
Monahan, A. H., 2012b: The temporal autocorrelation structure of sea surface winds. J. Climate, 25, 6684–6700.
Murphy, A. H., 1988: Skill scores based on the mean square error and their relationship to the correlation coefficient. Mon. Wea. Rev., 116, 2417–2424.
Perry, K., 2001: SeaWinds on QuikSCAT level 3: Daily, gridded ocean wind vectors (JPL SeaWinds project). California Institute of Technology Tech. Rep. D-20335, 39 pp.
Pinson, P., 2012: Adaptive calibration of (u, υ)-wind ensemble forecasts. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 138, 1273–1284.
Schuhen, N., T. L. Thorarinsdottir, and T. Gneiting, 2012: Ensemble model output statistics for wind vectors. Mon. Wea. Rev., 140, 3204–3219.
Silverman, B. W., 1986: Density Estimation for Statistics and Data Analysis. Chapman and Hall, 175 pp.
Sloughter, J. M., T. Gneiting, and A. E. Raftery, 2013: Probabilistic wind vector forecasting using ensembles and Bayesian model averaging. Mon. Wea. Rev., 141, 2107–2119.
Soman, S., H. Zareipour, O. Malik, and P. Mandal, 2010: A review of wind power and wind speed forecasting methods with different time horizons. Proc. 42nd North American Power Symp., Arlington, TX, IEEE, doi:10.1109/NAPS.2010.5619586.
Sun, C., and A. H. Monahan, 2013: Statistical downscaling prediction of sea surface winds over the global ocean. J. Climate, in press.
Thorarinsdottir, T., and T. Gneiting, 2010: Probabilistic forecasts of wind speed: Ensemble model output statistics using heteroscedastic censored regression. J. Roy. Stat. Soc., 173A, 371–388.
van der Kamp, D., C. Curry, and A. H. Monahan, 2012: Statistical downscaling of historical monthly mean winds over a coastal region of complex terrain. II: Predicting wind components. Climate Dyn., 38, 1301–1311.
Wilks, D. S., 2005: Statistical Methods in the Atmospheric Sciences. 2nd ed. Academic Press, 648 pp.
Zhang, J., S. Chowdhury, A. Messac, and L. Castillo, 2013: A multivariate and multimodal wind distribution model. Renewable Energy, 51, 436–447.