The Year of Polar Prediction site Model Intercomparison Project (YOPPsiteMIP) phase 1: project overview and Arctic winter forecast evaluation
-
Published:2024-07-24
Issue:14
Volume:17
Page:5511-5543
-
ISSN:1991-9603
-
Container-title:Geoscientific Model Development
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Geosci. Model Dev.
Author:
Day Jonathan J.ORCID, Svensson GunillaORCID, Casati Barbara, Uttal TaneilORCID, Khalsa Siri-JodhaORCID, Bazile EricORCID, Akish Elena, Azouz Niramson, Ferrighi Lara, Frank Helmut, Gallagher MichaelORCID, Godøy Øystein, Hartten Leslie M.ORCID, Huang Laura X., Holt Jareth, Di Stefano Massimo, Suomi IreneORCID, Mariani ZenORCID, Morris SaraORCID, O'Connor EwanORCID, Pirazzini RobertaORCID, Remes Teresa, Fadeev RostislavORCID, Solomon Amy, Tjernström Johanna, Tolstykh MikhailORCID
Abstract
Abstract. Although the quality of weather forecasts in the polar regions is improving, forecast skill there still lags behind lower latitudes. So far there have been relatively few efforts to evaluate processes in numerical weather prediction systems using in situ and remote sensing datasets from meteorological observatories in the terrestrial Arctic and Antarctic compared to the mid-latitudes. Progress has been limited both by the heterogeneous nature of observatory and forecast data and by limited availability of the parameters needed to perform process-oriented evaluation in multi-model forecast archives. The Year of Polar Prediction (YOPP) site Model Inter-comparison Project (YOPPsiteMIP) is addressing this gap by producing merged observatory data files (MODFs) and merged model data files (MMDFs), bringing together observations and forecast data at polar meteorological observatories in a format designed to facilitate process-oriented evaluation. An evaluation of forecast performance was performed at seven Arctic sites, focussing on the first YOPP Special Observing Period in the Northern Hemisphere (NH-SOP1) in February and March 2018. It demonstrated that although the characteristics of forecast skill vary between the different sites and systems, an underestimation in boundary layer temperature variability across models, which goes hand in hand with an inability to capture cold extremes, is a common issue at several sites. It is found that many models tend to underestimate the sensitivity of the 2 m air temperature (T2m) and the surface skin temperature to variations in radiative forcing, and the reasons for this are discussed.
Funder
Horizon 2020 Russian Science Foundation Norges Forskningsråd
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Reference112 articles.
1. Akish, E. and Morris, S.: MODF for Eureka, Canada, during YOPP SOP1 and SOP2, Norwegian Meteorological Institute, https://doi.org/10.21343/R85J-TC61, 2023a. 2. Akish, E. and Morris, S.: MODF for Tiksi, Russia, during YOPP SOP1 and SOP2, Norwegian Meteorological Institute, https://doi.org/10.21343/5BWN-W881, 2023b. 3. Akish, E. and Morris, S.: MODF for Utqiagvik, Alaska, during YOPP SOP1 and SOP2, Norwegian Meteorological Institute, https://doi.org/10.21343/A2DX-NQ55, 2023c. 4. Arduini, G., Balsamo, G., Dutra, E., Day, J. J., Sandu, I., Boussetta, S., and Haiden, T.: Impact of a multi-layer snow scheme on near-surface weather forecasts, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 11, 4687–4710, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001725, 2019. 5. Atlaskin, E. and Vihma, T.: Evaluation of NWP results for wintertime nocturnal boundary-layer temperatures over Europe and Finland, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 138, 1440–1451, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.1885, 2012.
|
|