ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide 1 Forecast sensitivity to Observation Carla Cardinali.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
TWO STEP EQUATIONS 1. SOLVE FOR X 2. DO THE ADDITION STEP FIRST
Advertisements

You have been given a mission and a code. Use the code to complete the mission and you will save the world from obliteration…
Fill in missing numbers or operations
Advanced Piloting Cruise Plot.
Copyright © 2003 Pearson Education, Inc. Slide 1 Computer Systems Organization & Architecture Chapters 8-12 John D. Carpinelli.
1 Copyright © 2010, Elsevier Inc. All rights Reserved Fig 2.1 Chapter 2.
By D. Fisher Geometric Transformations. Reflection, Rotation, or Translation 1.
Business Transaction Management Software for Application Coordination 1 Business Processes and Coordination.
Jeopardy General Compare & Order AdditionSubtraction Vocabulary Q $100 Q $200 Q $300 Q $400 Q $500 Q $100 Q $200 Q $300 Q $400 Q $500 Final Jeopardy.
and 6.855J Cycle Canceling Algorithm. 2 A minimum cost flow problem , $4 20, $1 20, $2 25, $2 25, $5 20, $6 30, $
1 RA I Sub-Regional Training Seminar on CLIMAT&CLIMAT TEMP Reporting Casablanca, Morocco, 20 – 22 December 2005 Status of observing programmes in RA I.
Norwegian Meteorological Institute met.no LAMEPS – Limited area ensemble forecasting in Norway, using targeted EPS Marit Helene Jensen, Inger-Lise Frogner,
The Wave Model ECMWF, Reading, UK.
ECMWF Training Course 2008 slide 1 Influence matrix diagnostic to monitor the assimilation system Carla Cardinali.
ECMWF Observation Influence DA School Buenos Aires 2008 slide 1 Influence matrix diagnostic to monitor the assimilation system Carla Cardinali.
F. Prates Data Assimilation Training Course April Error Tracking F. Prates.
Jeopardy Q 1 Q 6 Q 11 Q 16 Q 21 Q 2 Q 7 Q 12 Q 17 Q 22 Q 3 Q 8 Q 13
Jeopardy Q 1 Q 6 Q 11 Q 16 Q 21 Q 2 Q 7 Q 12 Q 17 Q 22 Q 3 Q 8 Q 13
Title Subtitle.
CALENDAR.
0 - 0.
DIVIDING INTEGERS 1. IF THE SIGNS ARE THE SAME THE ANSWER IS POSITIVE 2. IF THE SIGNS ARE DIFFERENT THE ANSWER IS NEGATIVE.
MULTIPLICATION EQUATIONS 1. SOLVE FOR X 3. WHAT EVER YOU DO TO ONE SIDE YOU HAVE TO DO TO THE OTHER 2. DIVIDE BY THE NUMBER IN FRONT OF THE VARIABLE.
MULT. INTEGERS 1. IF THE SIGNS ARE THE SAME THE ANSWER IS POSITIVE 2. IF THE SIGNS ARE DIFFERENT THE ANSWER IS NEGATIVE.
FACTORING ax2 + bx + c Think “unfoil” Work down, Show all steps.
Addition Facts
Around the World AdditionSubtraction MultiplicationDivision AdditionSubtraction MultiplicationDivision.
£1 Million £500,000 £250,000 £125,000 £64,000 £32,000 £16,000 £8,000 £4,000 £2,000 £1,000 £500 £300 £200 £100 Welcome.
ZMQS ZMQS
1 Copyright Copyright 2012.
On Sequential Experimental Design for Empirical Model-Building under Interval Error Sergei Zhilin, Altai State University, Barnaul, Russia.
PP Test Review Sections 6-1 to 6-6
ABC Technology Project
© Charles van Marrewijk, An Introduction to Geographical Economics Brakman, Garretsen, and Van Marrewijk.
VOORBLAD.
Effects on UK of Eustatic sea Level rise GIS is used to evaluate flood risk. Insurance companies use GIS models to assess likely impact and consequently.
1 RA III - Regional Training Seminar on CLIMAT&CLIMAT TEMP Reporting Buenos Aires, Argentina, 25 – 27 October 2006 Status of observing programmes in RA.
ECMWF Observation Influence Training Course 2010 slide 1 Influence matrix diagnostic to monitor the assimilation system Carla Cardinali.
Squares and Square Root WALK. Solve each problem REVIEW:
Created by Susan Neal $100 Fractions Addition Fractions Subtraction Fractions Multiplication Fractions Division General $200 $300 $400 $500 $100 $200.
© 2012 National Heart Foundation of Australia. Slide 2.
Adding Up In Chunks.
Lets play bingo!!. Calculate: MEAN Calculate: MEDIAN
MaK_Full ahead loaded 1 Alarm Page Directory (F11)
Sets Sets © 2005 Richard A. Medeiros next Patterns.
Chapter 5 Test Review Sections 5-1 through 5-4.
GG Consulting, LLC I-SUITE. Source: TEA SHARS Frequently asked questions 2.
Before Between After.
Addition 1’s to 20.
Model and Relationships 6 M 1 M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M
25 seconds left…...
Equal or Not. Equal or Not
Slippery Slope
Test B, 100 Subtraction Facts
Institut für Physik der Atmosphäre Institut für Physik der Atmosphäre Object-Oriented Best Member Selection in a Regional Ensemble Forecasting System Christian.
1 Atlantic Annual Viewing Trends Adults 35-54, Total TV, By Daypart Average Minute Audience (000) Average Weekly Reach (%) Average Weekly Hours Viewed.
Week 1.
Number bonds to 10,
We will resume in: 25 Minutes.
Converting a Fraction to %
Numerical Analysis 1 EE, NCKU Tien-Hao Chang (Darby Chang)
Partial Products. Category 1 1 x 3-digit problems.
PSSA Preparation.
How Cells Obtain Energy from Food
ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide 1 Forecast sensitivity to Observation Carla Cardinali.
ECMWF WMO Data Impact Workshop Geneva 2008 slide 1 Towards an adaptive observation network: monitoring the observations impact in ECMWF forecast Carla.
Presentation transcript:

ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide 1 Forecast sensitivity to Observation Carla Cardinali

ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide 2 Outline Part 2: Forecast Sensitivity Forecast Sensitivity to Observation Sensitivity gradient A-TReC campaigns Comparing Observation Analysis Influence and Observation Forecast Impact Results and Conclusion

ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide 3 Forecast Sensitivity to Observation J is measures the forecast error: its gradient respect the observation vector y gives the forecast error sensitivity respect observations used in the initial condition for model forecast the sensitivity respect the initial condition x a Analysis sensitivity with respect the observation

ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide 4 Define Forecast Sensitivity

ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide 5 Change of Variable

ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide 6 Computation z Linear system to solve zaza

ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide 7 Forecast Sensitivity to Observations Tangent Linear Model ResolutionT95 L60

ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide 8 Sensitivity Gradients Sensitive area Verification area T1T1 100* TE at t=0 100* KE at t=0 TE at t=T 1 KE at t=T hPa Temperature Sensitivity Gradients

ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide 9 Fc Sensitivity to Aircraft Temperature 500 hPa

ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide 10 Fc Sensitivity to Surface Pressure

ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide 11 Observation Campaign 5 Dec 18 UTC---Verification 7 Dec 12 UTC AtreC 13% MSLP Relative Fc Improvement 9% Total Energy Targeting = Verification Region Lat(30,50)-Lon(-85,-60) 42 h TargetIN/NOTargetIN % AMDAR 2.5 SONDE 5.5 An 5 Dec 18 UTC

ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide 12 Observations Contribution to Forecast Total Contribution Mean Contribution

ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide 13 Forecast and Analysis Sensitivity to Targeted Observations

ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide hPa Targeted Aircraft Temperature Forecast Error

ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide 15 Aircraft Observation U-Comp hPa Forecast Impact Observation Influence in Analysis Background Influence = 1-Observation Influence

ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide 16 TEMP Observation Temperature hPa Forecast Impact Observation Influence in Analysis Background Influence = 1-Observation Influence

ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide 17 Total Forecast Error 5 Dec 2003 TargetIN/NOTargetIN 8%

ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide 18 Observation Campaign 8 Dec 18 UTC---Verification 11 Dec 00 UTC TargetIN/NOTargetIN % AMDAR 2.6 SONDE 0.9 AtreC -71% MSLP Relative Fc Degradation -7% Total Energy Targeting Lat(30,60)-Lon(-70,-15) Verification Lat(45,65)-Lon(-15,+10) 54 h

ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide hPa Targeted Aircraft U Forecast Error

ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide 20 Total Forecast Error 8 Dec 2003 TargetIN/NOTargetIN 3.5%

ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide 21 Conclusions Forecast sensitivity to observations has been computed for the campaigns showing an impact (ATreC-Cntr)/Cntr ± 10% 13 cases out of 38: 9 positive and 4 negative Two campaigns have been shown 5 Dec at 18 UTC - Targeted observations improved the forecast of a cyclone moving along the east coast of North America for which severe weather impact was forecast 8 Dec at 18 UTC – Targeted observations deployed to clarify the models uncertainties for the remnants of the east cost storm, degraded the forecast over Northern Europe – UK However, differences in forecast impact between ATreC and Cntr come also from the continuous assimilation cycling that provides different model trajectories Forecast Impact computed for the cancelled campaigns gives on average ±10% in term of RMSE in the verification area

ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide 22 END

ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide 23 Singular vectors brief definition Singular vectors was one of technique used in AtreC-TOST campaign to find sensitivity areas where releasing additional observations Singular vectors (SVs) define perturbations with fastest growth during a finite time interval (optimization time interval). They are defined by: The model characteristics: T L 95L60, dry, with simplified physics The norm used to measure growth: localized total energy The optimization time interval: hours Diagnostic Singular vectors have been computed to investigate the observation impact in the forecast time Sensitive area Verification area

ECMWF Training Course 2005 slide 24 Linear combination of 10 Diagnostic SVs valid at observation time AtreC observation time forecast step T 1 localized total energy maximum in verification area eigenvalues decomposition forecast error step T 1 proj. fc error onto SVs Back to the observation time Sensitive area Verification area T1T1