Are Atlantic basin tropical cyclone intensity forecasts improving? Jonathan R. Moskaitis 67 th IHC / 2013 Tropical Cyclone Research Forum Naval Research.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Statistical vs. Practical Significance
Advertisements

Ani Nenkova Lucy Vanderwende Kathleen McKeown SIGIR 2006.
Andrea Schumacher, CIRA/CSU Mark DeMaria, NOAA/NESDIS/StAR Dan Brown and Ed Rappaport, NHC.
Stat 112: Lecture 7 Notes Homework 2: Due next Thursday The Multiple Linear Regression model (Chapter 4.1) Inferences from multiple regression analysis.
Inference for Regression
Ch. 21 Practice.
Figure 1.1 Area of responsibility of the RSMC Tokyo - Typhoon Center.
LECTURE 3 Introduction to Linear Regression and Correlation Analysis
LINEAR REGRESSION: Evaluating Regression Models Overview Assumptions for Linear Regression Evaluating a Regression Model.
LINEAR REGRESSION: Evaluating Regression Models. Overview Assumptions for Linear Regression Evaluating a Regression Model.
Lecture 6 Notes Note: I will homework 2 tonight. It will be due next Thursday. The Multiple Linear Regression model (Chapter 4.1) Inferences from.
Quantitative Business Analysis for Decision Making Simple Linear Regression.
Business Statistics - QBM117 Least squares regression.
Measures of Association Deepak Khazanchi Chapter 18.
Correlation and Regression Analysis
Correlation and Linear Regression
Regression and Correlation Methods Judy Zhong Ph.D.
+ Effects of Climate Change on Ocean Storms Chloe Mawer.
Copyright © 2013, 2009, and 2007, Pearson Education, Inc. Chapter 12 Analyzing the Association Between Quantitative Variables: Regression Analysis Section.
Is Integrated Kinetic Energy a Comprehensive Index to Describe Tropical Cyclone Destructiveness? Emily Madison.
Non-continuous Relationships If the relationship between the dependent variable and an independent variable is non-continuous a slope dummy variable can.
ALGEBRA WORKSHOP SESSION 3 Tricia Profic, Erie 1 BOCES.
1 FORECASTING Regression Analysis Aslı Sencer Graduate Program in Business Information Systems.
A. Schumacher, CIRA/Colorado State University NHC Points of Contact: M. DeMaria, D. Brown, M. Brennan, R. Berg, C. Ogden, C. Mattocks, and C. Landsea Joint.
University of Arkansas Faculty Senate Task Force on Grades Preliminary Report April 19, 2005.
CHAPTER 15 Simple Linear Regression and Correlation
Quantitative Skills 1: Graphing
The Impact of Satellite Data on Real Time Statistical Tropical Cyclone Intensity Forecasts Joint Hurricane Testbed Project Mark DeMaria, NOAA/NESDIS/ORA,
Advanced Higher Statistics Data Analysis and Modelling Hypothesis Testing Statistical Inference AH.
Continued Development of Tropical Cyclone Wind Probability Products John A. Knaff – Presenting CIRA/Colorado State University and Mark DeMaria NOAA/NESDIS.
Application and Improvements to COAMPS-TC Richard M. Hodur 1, J. Doyle 2, E. Hendricks 2, Y. Jin 2, J. Moskaitis 2, K. Sashegyi 2, J. Schmidt 2 1 Innovative.
An Improved Wind Probability Program: A Joint Hurricane Testbed Project Update Mark DeMaria and John Knaff, NOAA/NESDIS, Fort Collins, CO Stan Kidder,
61 st IHC, New Orleans, LA Verification of the Monte Carlo Tropical Cyclone Wind Speed Probabilities: A Joint Hurricane Testbed Project Update John A.
Normal Distribution.
Chapter 16 Data Analysis: Testing for Associations.
4-1 Operations Management Forecasting Chapter 4 - Part 2.
Lecture 4 Introduction to Multiple Regression
1 Quadratic Model In order to account for curvature in the relationship between an explanatory and a response variable, one often adds the square of the.
FROST DAYS AND TROPICAL NIGHTS IN THE IBERIAN PENINSULA, F.S. Rodrigo, S. Fernández-Montes Department of Applied Physics, University of Almería.
Evaluation of Experimental Models for Tropical Cyclone Forecasting in Support of the NOAA Hurricane Forecast Improvement Project (HFIP) Barbara G. Brown,
Applied Quantitative Analysis and Practices LECTURE#25 By Dr. Osman Sadiq Paracha.
National Hurricane Center 2010 Forecast Verification James L. Franklin and John Cangialosi Hurricane Specialist Unit National Hurricane Center 2011 Interdepartmental.
The First Year SFMR Surface Wind Observations from AFRC WC-130J Aircraft: Impact on Operational Hurricane Forecasts and Warnings Peter G. Black (1), Jonathan.
Last lecture summary Population 2015.
Tropical cyclone activity in the Minerva T1279 seasonal forecasts. Preliminary analysis Julia Manganello 1, Kevin Hodges 2 1 COLA, USA 2 NERC Centre for.
Development of a Rapid Intensification Index for the Eastern Pacific Basin John Kaplan NOAA/AOML Hurricane Research Division Miami, FL and Mark DeMaria.
Improved Statistical Intensity Forecast Models: A Joint Hurricane Testbed Year 2 Project Update Mark DeMaria, NOAA/NESDIS, Fort Collins, CO John A. Knaff,
2006 NHC Verification Report Interdepartmental Hurricane Conference 5 March 2007 James L. Franklin NHC/TPC.
26134 Business Statistics Week 4 Tutorial Simple Linear Regression Key concepts in this tutorial are listed below 1. Detecting.
Andrea Schumacher, CIRA/CSU Mark DeMaria and John Knaff, NOAA/NESDIS/StAR.
National Hurricane Center 2009 Forecast Verification James L. Franklin Branch Chief, Hurricane Specialist Unit National Hurricane Center 2009 NOAA Hurricane.
National Hurricane Center 2010 Forecast Verification James L. Franklin Branch Chief, Hurricane Specialist Unit National Hurricane Center 2010 NOAA Hurricane.
Recommended modeling approach Version 2.0. The law of conflicting data Axiom Data is true Implication Conflicting data implies model misspecification.
M. Fiorino :: 63 rd IHC St. Petersburg, FL Recent trends in dynamical medium- range tropical cyclone track prediction and the role of resolution.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2003 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.,All Rights Reserved. Part Four ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION OF DATA.
26134 Business Statistics Week 4 Tutorial Simple Linear Regression Key concepts in this tutorial are listed below 1. Detecting.
Chapter 11: Linear Regression E370, Spring From Simple Regression to Multiple Regression.
Prediction of Consensus Tropical Cyclone Track Forecast Error ( ) James S. Goerss NRL Monterey March 1, 2011.
of Temperature in the San Francisco Bay Area
Chapter 14 Introduction to Multiple Regression
Seasonal Climate Outlook of China in Summer 2017
Using Lightning Data to Monitor the Intensification of Tropical Cyclones in the Eastern North Pacific By: Lesley Leary1, Liz Ritchie1, Nick Demetriades2,
Advanced Higher Statistics
The Skinny on High School
of Temperature in the San Francisco Bay Area
Measuring Bias in forecast
Regression Computer Print Out
Difference between TP-40, TP-49, and HYDRO-35 and NRCC Data
Introduction to Hypothesis Testing
Presentation transcript:

Are Atlantic basin tropical cyclone intensity forecasts improving? Jonathan R. Moskaitis 67 th IHC / 2013 Tropical Cyclone Research Forum Naval Research Laboratory Monterey, CA 7 March 2013 Mean absolute error (kt) Year 0 h 12 h 24 h 36 h 48 h 72 h OFCL yearly Atlantic intensity MAE, with weighted trends +25% -41% +14% +1% -4% -9% ** * % change ( ) Statistically Significant? 1

Mean absolute error (kt) Year 0 h 12 h 24 h 36 h 48 h 72 h OFCL yearly Atlantic intensity MAE, with weighted trends +25% -41% +14% +1% -4% -9% ** * % change ( ) Statistically Significant? Introduction In order to understand the OFCL intensity MAE trends, it is necessary to consider how both the statistics of the forecasts and the statistics of the best track analyses have changed over the years. 2

Objective (1)Investigate best track intensities over the period in order to discern if significant changes to the statistics of the verifying analyses have taken place (2) Evaluate the implications of the evolution of the best track intensity statistics over the years for the interpretation of the OFCL intensity MAE trends Data: ATCF a-decks and b-decks Intensity change: Δt = 96 h ΔI = 30 kt Irene (2011) best track intensity Best track intensity change time interval Best track intensity change 3

ΔI relative frequency distribution, Δt = 12 h Best track intensity change: vs  Lower relative frequency of small-magnitude intensity changes for than for  Higher relative frequency of large-magnitude intensity changes for than for

ΔI relative frequency distribution, Δt = 24 h Best track intensity change: vs  Lower relative frequency of small-magnitude intensity changes for than for  Higher relative frequency of large-magnitude intensity changes for than for

ΔI relative frequency distribution, Δt = 48 h Best track intensity change: vs  Lower relative frequency of small-magnitude intensity changes for than for  Higher relative frequency of large-magnitude intensity changes for than for

ΔI relative frequency distribution, Δt = 72 h  Lower relative frequency of small-magnitude intensity changes for than for  Higher relative frequency of large-magnitude intensity changes for than for Best track intensity change: vs

-h 1 h1h1 -h 2 h2h2 ΔI relative frequency distribution, Δt = 72 h Best track intensity change: vs RF S = Relative frequency of small-magnitude intensity change, | ΔI | ≤ h 1 RF L = Relative frequency of large-magnitude intensity change, | ΔI | ≥ h 2 8

ΔtΔtRF S RF L 6 h-23**90* 12 h-37**138* 24 h-29**86* 36 h-17117* 48 h-8126* 72 h h h-1093 % change ( ) Relative frequency of small-magnitude intensity change (RF S ) Relative frequency of large-magnitude intensity change (RF L ) Best track intensity change: Trends in yearly samples Δt = 12 h Δt = 24 h Δt = 48 h Δt = 72 h Relative frequency Year For all Δt, the trend indicates decreasing relative frequency of small-magnitude intensity changes and increasing relative frequency of large-magnitude intensity changes 9

Best track intensity change: Trends in yearly samples Yearly AAIC with weighted trend, Δt = 12, 24, 36, 48, 72 h 12 h 24 h 36 h 48 h 72 h % change ( ) Statistically Significant? +44% +32% +25% +21% ** * * ΔtΔtAAIC 6 h46** 12 h44** 24 h32* 36 h25* 48 h21 72 h21 96 h h19 % change ( ) For all Δt, there is an increasing trend in AAIC AAIC = Average absolute intensity change 10

 AAIC can be interpreted as a measure of forecast difficulty  AAIC = MAE of persistence intensity forecasts  How does AAIC compare to OFCL intensity MAE? Standardized residuals Yearly value and weighted trend (kt) AAIC for Δt = 12 h and OFCL MAE for lead time = 12 h +25% +44% ρ = 0.72 Best track intensity change: Relationship with OFCL intensity MAE AAIC for Δt = 24 h and OFCL MAE for lead time = 24 h ρ = % +14% 11

 AAIC can be interpreted as a measure of forecast difficulty  AAIC = MAE of persistence intensity forecasts  How does AAIC compare to OFCL intensity MAE? Standardized residuals Yearly value and weighted trend (kt) AAIC for Δt = 12 h and OFCL MAE for lead time = 48 h Best track intensity change: Relationship with OFCL intensity MAE AAIC for Δt = 24 h and OFCL MAE for lead time = 72 h ρ = % -4% ρ = % +21% On the decadal time scale, AAIC (forecast difficulty) and OFCL MAE have different trends. The slope of AAIC trend > slope of OFCL MAE trend. Year-to-year departures from the trend lines are highly correlated, suggesting the AAIC departure controls the OFCL MAE departure. 12

 Normalized MAE = OFCL MAE / AAIC  Accounts for forecast difficulty, as measured by AAIC 36 h 24 h 12 h -13% -14% -20% * * * 48 h 72 h -21% -23% * * Best track intensity change: Relationship with OFCL intensity MAE For all lead times, there is a statistically significant decreasing trend in normalized MAE 13

Summary and conclusions Analysis of Atlantic best track intensities during the period shows:  Decreasing trend in relative frequency of small-magnitude intensity changes (RF S )  Increasing trend in relative frequency of large-magnitude intensity changes (RF L )  Increasing trend in average absolute intensity change (AAIC) Trends in OFCL intensity MAE should be interpreted in context of the AAIC, to account for evolution in the statistics of the best track intensities on the decadal time scale  After normalizing by AAIC, OFCL intensity MAE shows statistically significant decreasing trends at 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72 h  AAIC can be interpreted as a measure of forecast difficulty Question for future research: Why are there trends in AAIC, RF S, and RF L ? 14