High-resolution (3 km) time-lagged (initialized every 3 h) multimodel ensembles were produced in support of the Hydrometeorological Testbed (HMT)-West-2006 campaign in northern California, covering the American River basin (ARB). Multiple mesoscale models were used, including the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model, Regional Atmospheric Modeling System (RAMS), and fifth-generation Pennsylvania State University–National Center for Atmospheric Research Mesoscale Model (MM5). Short-range (6 h) quantitative precipitation forecasts (QPFs) and probabilistic QPFs (PQPFs) were compared to the 4-km NCEP stage IV precipitation analyses for archived intensive operation periods (IOPs). The two sets of ensemble runs (operational and rerun forecasts) were examined to evaluate the quality of high-resolution QPFs produced by time-lagged multimodel ensembles and to investigate the impacts of ensemble configurations on forecast skill. Uncertainties in precipitation forecasts were associated with different models, model physics, and initial and boundary conditions. The diabatic initialization by the Local Analysis and Prediction System (LAPS) helped precipitation forecasts, while the selection of microphysics was critical in ensemble design. Probability biases in the ensemble products were addressed by calibrating PQPFs. Using artificial neural network (ANN) and linear regression (LR) methods, the bias correction of PQPFs and a cross-validation procedure were applied to three operational IOPs and four rerun IOPs. Both the ANN and LR methods effectively improved PQPFs, especially for lower thresholds. The LR method outperformed the ANN method in bias correction, in particular for a smaller training data size. More training data (e.g., one-season forecasts) are desirable to test the robustness of both calibration methods.
Short-Range Precipitation Forecasts from Time-Lagged Multimodel Ensembles during the HMT-West-2006 Campaign
Authors:
Huiling Yuan, John A. McGinley, Paul J. Schultz, Christopher J. Anderson*, and Chungu Lu* AffiliationsNOAA/Earth System Research Laboratory, Boulder, Colorado
Received: 19 January 2007
Final Form: 30 September 2007
Published Online: 1 June 2008
June 2008
![Publication Cover](https://webarchive.library.unt.edu/web/20170119141457im_/http://journals.ametsoc.org/na101/home/literatum/publisher/ams/journals/content/hydr/2008/15257541-9.3/15257541-9.3/production/15257541-9.3.cover.jpg)
Share this Article
Featured Collections
Mountain Terrain Atmospheric Modeling and Observations (MATERHORN) -BAMS, JAMC,MWR, WAF
LatMix -BAMS, JPO, JTECH
PANDOWAE -MWR, JAS, WAF, JTECH
Most Read JHM Articles
(past 12 months)
. |
Liu
March 2016, Vol. 17, No. 3
|
. |
Sospedra-Alfonso et al.
September 2016, Vol. 17, No. 9
|
. |
Arnault et al.
May 2016, Vol. 17, No. 5
|
. |
Duerinck et al.
June 2016, Vol. 17, No. 6
|
. |
Cattani et al.
October 2016, Vol. 17, No. 10
|
. |
Dirmeyer et al.
April 2016, Vol. 17, No. 4
|
Most Cited (past 12 months)
-
1. The TRMM Multisatellite Precipitation Analysis (TMPA): Quasi-Global, Multiyear, Combined-Sensor Precipitation Estimates at Fine ScalesHuffman et al.February 2007, Vol. 8, No. 1 -
2. The Version-2 Global Precipitation Climatology Project (GPCP) Monthly Precipitation Analysis (1979–Present)Adler et al.December 2003, Vol. 4, No. 6 -
3. A Global Dataset of Palmer Drought Severity Index for 1870–2002: Relationship with Soil Moisture and Effects of Surface WarmingDai et al.December 2004, Vol. 5, No. 6 -
4. CMORPH: A Method that Produces Global Precipitation Estimates from Passive Microwave and Infrared Data at High Spatial and Temporal ResolutionJoyce et al.June 2004, Vol. 5, No. 3 -
5. Global Precipitation at One-Degree Daily Resolution from Multisatellite ObservationsHuffman et al.February 2001, Vol. 2, No. 1 -
6. Creation of the WATCH Forcing Data and Its Use to Assess Global and Regional Reference Crop Evaporation over Land during the Twentieth CenturyWeedon et al.October 2011, Vol. 12, No. 5