1 / 3

Overall Statistics RMSE WRF-UA: 159 W m -2 WRF-UCSD: 171 W m -2 STDERR ‘Bias-corrected RMSE’

Overall Statistics RMSE WRF-UA: 159 W m -2 WRF-UCSD: 171 W m -2 STDERR ‘Bias-corrected RMSE’ WRF-UA: 165 W m -2 WRF-UCSD: 164 W m -2 Ratios compared to NAM WRF-UA more accurate for 4/6 days Forecast horizon WRF-UCSD is more accurate for the first 6-7 hours of simulation time.

karl
Télécharger la présentation

Overall Statistics RMSE WRF-UA: 159 W m -2 WRF-UCSD: 171 W m -2 STDERR ‘Bias-corrected RMSE’

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Overall Statistics RMSE • WRF-UA: 159 W m-2 • WRF-UCSD: 171 W m-2 • STDERR • ‘Bias-corrected RMSE’ • WRF-UA: 165 W m-2 • WRF-UCSD: 164 W m-2 • Ratios compared to NAM • WRF-UA more accurate for 4/6 days • Forecast horizon • WRF-UCSD is more accurate for the first 6-7 hours of simulation time

  2. WRF-UA WRF-UCSD 1500 UTC 8/10/2011 • WRF-UCSD performed much worse than WRF-UA • Not enough cloud cover (afternoon) • Scale of clouds • WRF-UA cloud scales are much smaller, despite WRF-UA having slightly coarser resolution (1.8 km vs. 1.3 km) 1900 UTC 2200 UTC

  3. WRF-UA WRF-UCSD • 8/12/2011 • Largest improvement over WRF-UA • Cloud field burnoff • Timing captured by WRF-UCSD • Too many afternoon clouds in WRF-UA • WRF-UA has two distinct types of clouds from the model 1700 UTC Clouds generated by PBL scheme? Shallow convection? 2000 UTC 2200 UTC

More Related