dc.contributor.author
Angus, Michael
dc.contributor.author
Widmann, Martin
dc.contributor.author
Orr, Andrew
dc.contributor.author
Ashrit, Raghavendra
dc.contributor.author
Leckebusch, Gregor C.
dc.contributor.author
Mitra, Ashis
dc.date.accessioned
2024-06-26T09:19:38Z
dc.date.available
2024-06-26T09:19:38Z
dc.identifier.uri
https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/handle/fub188/43243
dc.identifier.uri
http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/refubium-42959
dc.description.abstract
Accurate ensemble forecasts of heavy precipitation in India are vital for many applications and essential for early warning of damaging flood events, especially during the monsoon season. In this study we investigate to what extent Quantile Mapping (QM) and Ensemble Model Output Statistics (EMOS) statistical postprocessing reduce errors in precipitation ensemble forecasts over India, in particular for heavy precipitation. Both methods are applied to day-1 forecasts at 12-km resolution from the 23-member National Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecasting (NCMRWF) global ensemble prediction system (NEPS-G). By construction, QM leads to distributions close to the observed ones, while EMOS optimizes the ensemble spread, and it is not a priori clear which is better suited for practical applications. The methods are therefore compared with respect to several key aspects of the forecasts: local distributions, ensemble spread, and skill for forecasting precipitation amounts and the exceedance of heavy-precipitation thresholds. The evaluation includes rank histograms, Continuous Ranked Probability Skill Scores (CRPSS), Brier Skill Scores (BSS), reliability diagrams, and receiver operating characteristic. EMOS performs best not only with respect to correcting under- or overdispersive ensembles, but also in terms of forecast skill for precipitation amounts and heavy precipitation events, with positive CRPSS and BSS in most regions (both up to about 0.4 in some areas), while QM in many regions performs worse than the raw forecast. QM performs best with respect to the overall local precipitation distributions. Which aspects of the forecasts are most relevant depends to some extent on how the forecasts are used. If the main criteria are the correction of under- or overdispersion, forecast reliability, match between the forecasted distribution for individual days and observations (CRPSS), and the skill in forecasting heavy-precipitation events (BSS), then EMOS is the better choice for postprocessing NEPS-G forecasts for short lead times.
en
dc.format.extent
19 Seiten
dc.rights.uri
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subject
heavy precipitation
en
dc.subject
quantile mapping
en
dc.subject
statistical postprocessing
en
dc.subject
summer monsoon
en
dc.subject
weather forecasts
en
dc.subject.ddc
500 Naturwissenschaften und Mathematik::550 Geowissenschaften, Geologie::551 Geologie, Hydrologie, Meteorologie
dc.title
A comparison of two statistical postprocessing methods for heavy-precipitation forecasts over India during the summer monsoon
dc.type
Wissenschaftlicher Artikel
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.doi
10.1002/qj.4677
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.journaltitle
Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.number
761
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.pagestart
1865
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.pageend
1883
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.volume
150
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.url
https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.4677
refubium.affiliation
Geowissenschaften
refubium.affiliation.other
Institut für Meteorologie

refubium.resourceType.isindependentpub
no
dcterms.accessRights.openaire
open access
dcterms.isPartOf.eissn
1477-870X
refubium.resourceType.provider
WoS-Alert