Operational verification system Rodica Dumitrache National Metorogical Administration ROMANIA.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Page 1© Crown copyright 2004 Skill scores for GEMS-aerosol Olivier Boucher GEMS - Kick-off meeting July 2005.
Advertisements

Slide 1ECMWF forecast User Meeting -- Reading, June 2006 Verification of weather parameters Anna Ghelli, ECMWF.
Slide 1ECMWF forecast products users meeting – Reading, June 2005 Verification of weather parameters Anna Ghelli, ECMWF.
QPF verification of the 4 model versions at 7 km res. (COSMO-I7, COSMO-7, COSMO-EU, COSMO-ME) with the 2 model versions at 2.8 km res. (COSMO- I2, COSMO-IT)
The use of the NWCSAF High Resolution Wind product in the mesoscale AROME model at the Hungarian Meteorological Service Máté Mile, Mária Putsay and Márta.
1 Operational low visibility statistical prediction Frédéric Atger (Météo-France)
European Storm Forecast Experiment Verification of Dichotomous Lightning Forecasts at the European Storm Forecast Experiment (ESTOFEX) Pieter Groenemeijer.
Federal Department of Home Affairs FDHA Federal Office of Meteorology and Climatology MeteoSwiss Quantitative precipitation forecasts in the Alps – first.
Measures of Spread The Range, Variance, and Standard Deviation.
Forecasting convective initiation over Alpine terrain by means of automatic nowcasting and a high-resolution NWP model Georg Pistotnik, Thomas Haiden,
Barbara Casati June 2009 FMI Verification of continuous predictands
Comparison of hybrid ensemble/4D- Var and 4D-Var within the NAVDAS- AR data assimilation framework The 6th EnKF Workshop May 18th-22nd1 Presenter: David.
Mean, Variance, and Standard Deviation for Grouped Data Section 3.3.
Measures of dispersion Standard deviation (from the mean) ready.
COSMO General Meeting Zurich, 2005 Institute of Meteorology and Water Management Warsaw, Poland- 1 - Verification of the LM at IMGW Katarzyna Starosta,
On the impact of the SSO scheme in the COSMO model into the development of a deep cyclone in the Tirrenian sea Case study: April Antonella Morgillo.
LAM activities in Romania Raluca RADU National Meteorological Administration, Bucharest, Romania ALADIN model ALADIN model.
4IWVM - Tutorial Session - June 2009 Verification of categorical predictands Anna Ghelli ECMWF.
Examples for the midterm. data = {4,3,6,3,9,6,3,2,6,9} Example 1 Mode = Median = Mean = Standard deviation = Variance = Z scores =
“New tools for the evaluation of convective scale ensemble systems” Seonaid Dey Supervisors: Bob Plant, Nigel Roberts and Stefano Migliorini.
Latest results in verification over Poland Katarzyna Starosta, Joanna Linkowska Institute of Meteorology and Water Management, Warsaw 9th COSMO General.
The latest results of verification over Poland Katarzyna Starosta Joanna Linkowska COSMO General Meeting, Cracow September 2008 Institute of Meteorology.
Quality control of daily data on example of Central European series of air temperature, relative humidity and precipitation P. Štěpánek (1), P. Zahradníček.
Educ 200C Wed. Oct 3, Variation What is it? What does it look like in a data set?
Operational ALADIN forecast in Croatian Meteorological and Hydrological Service 26th EWGLAM & 11th SRNWP meetings 4th - 7th October 2004,Oslo, Norway Zoran.
Federal Department of Home Affairs FDHA Federal Office of Meteorology and Climatology MeteoSwiss Local Probabilistic Weather Predictions for Switzerland.
Advanced interpretation and verification of very high resolution models National Meteorological Administration Rodica Dumitrache, Aurelia LUPASCU,
Traditional Verification Scores Fake forecasts  5 geometric  7 perturbed subjective evaluation  expert scores from last year’s workshop  9 cases x.
Ui-Yong Byun, Song-You Hong, Hyeyum Shin Deparment of Atmospheric Science, Yonsei Univ. Ji-Woo Lee, Jae-Ik Song, Sook-Jung Ham, Jwa-Kyum Kim, Hyung-Woo.
We would expect the ENTER score to depend on the average number of hours of study per week. So we take the average hours of study as the independent.
Linear Prediction Correlation can be used to make predictions – Values on X can be used to predict values on Y – Stronger relationships between X and Y.
WSN05, 5-9 Sep.2005, Toulouse, France 1 Portable HRM Station Value Verification Package “ORMVERIF” Sultan Salim AL-Yahyai Fauzi Bader Al-Busaidi Khalid.
I 5.11 Validation of the GMAO OSSE Prototype Runhua Yang 1,2 and Ronald Errico 1,3 1 Global Modeling and Assimilation office, GSFC, NASA 2 Science Systems.
Standard Deviation A Measure of Variation in a set of Data.
Station Models : Symbols used to represent weather conditions in a select location.
31 August 2015 Map Discussion Asheville, North Carolina Douglas Miller.
Page 1© Crown copyright 2005 Met Office Verification -status Clive Wilson, Presented by Mike Bush at EWGLAM Meeting October 8- 11, 2007.
16 November 2015 Map Discussion Asheville, North Carolina Douglas Miller.
10 November 2014 Map Discussion Asheville, North Carolina Douglas Miller.
Table 2.1 Monthly and annual total numbers of products issued by the RSMC Tokyo - Typhoon Center in 2011.
Gridded warning verification Harold E. Brooks NOAA/National Severe Storms Laboratory Norman, Oklahoma
Easy (and not so easy) questions to ask about adolescent health data J. Dennis Fortenberry MD MS Indiana University School of Medicine.
10th COSMO General Meeting, Cracow, Poland Verification of COSMOGR Over Greece 10 th COSMO General Meeting Cracow, Poland.
A physical initialization algorithm for non-hydrostatic NWP models using radar derived rain rates Günther Haase Meteorological Institute, University of.
COSMO - ROmania Liliana VELEA National Meteorological Administration, Bucharest, Romania.
Satellite Data Assimilation Activities at CIMSS for FY2003 Robert M. Aune Advanced Satellite Products Team NOAA/NESDIS/ORA/ARAD Cooperative Institute for.
Verification methods - towards a user oriented verification The verification group.
Global vs mesoscale ATOVS assimilation at the Met Office Global Large obs error (4 K) NESDIS 1B radiances NOAA-15 & 16 HIRS and AMSU thinned to 154 km.
Centro Nazionale di Meteorologia e Climatologia Aeronautica Common Verification Suite Zurich, Sep 2005 Alessandro GALLIANI, Patrizio EMILIANI, Adriano.
Evaluation of Precipitation from Weather Prediction Models, Satellites and Radars Charles Lin Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences McGill University,
UERRA user workshop, Toulouse, 3./4. Feb 2016Cristian Lussana and Michael Borsche 1 Evaluation software tools Cristian Lussana (2) and Michael Borsche.
Station Models. ESRT page 13 Temperature (degrees F) Top Left of Station Model.
Xuexing Qiu and Fuqing Dec. 2014
Station Models.
Systematic timing errors in km-scale NWP precipitation forecasts
COSMO Priority Project ”Quantitative Precipitation Forecasts”
WEATHER STATION MODEL Wind Speed Cloud Cover Temperature Wind
18 November 2013 Map Discussion
IMPROVING HURRICANE INTENSITY FORECASTS IN A MESOSCALE MODEL VIA MICROPHYSICAL PARAMETERIZATION METHODS By Cerese Albers & Dr. TN Krishnamurti- FSU Dept.
Binary Forecasts and Observations
آشنايی با اصول و پايه های يک آزمايش
Statistical vs. Physical Adaptation
Preliminary evaluations of COSMO RO using VERSUS
Standard Deviation (SD) & Standard Error of the Mean (SEM)
2007 Mei-yu season Chien and Kuo (2009), GPS Solutions
Standard Deviation How many Pets?.
Plans in Romania Dr. I.V.PESCARU.
Seasonal common scores plots
26 November 2018 Map Discussion
Verification using VERSUS at RHM
Presentation transcript:

Operational verification system Rodica Dumitrache National Metorogical Administration ROMANIA

COSMO-RO 7km resolution - 54 forecast hour 2m Temperature-January 2011 run 00UTC All Romanian stations Top left – mean error and root mean square error Top right – variance reduction Bottom left – Correlation coefficient Bottom right – Standard deviation

COSMO-RO 7km resolution - 54 forecast hour 2m Temperature-July 2011 run 00UTC All Romanian stations Top left – mean error and root mean square error Top right – variance reduction Bottom left – Correlation coefficient Bottom right – Standard deviation

COSMO-RO 7km resolution - 54 forecast hour Mean sea level pressure-January 2011 run 00UTC All Romanian stations Top left – mean error and root mean square error Top right – variance reduction Bottom left – Correlation coefficient Bottom right – Standard deviation

COSMO-RO 7km resolution - 54 forecast hour Mean sea level pressure -July 2011 run 00UTC All Romanian stations Top left – mean error and root mean square error Top right – variance reduction Bottom left – Correlation coefficient Bottom right – Standard deviation

COSMO-RO 7km resolution - 54 forecast hour Wind Speed 10m -January 2011 run 00UTC All Romanian stations Top left – mean error and root mean square error Top right – variance reduction Bottom left – Correlation coefficient Bottom right – Standard deviation

COSMO-RO 7km resolution - 54 forecast hour Wind Speed 10m -July 2011 run 00UTC All Romanian stations Top left – mean error and root mean square error Top right – variance reduction Bottom left – Correlation coefficient Bottom right – Standard deviation

COSMO-RO 7km resolution - 54 forecast hour 6H-Cumuleted precipitation -January 2011 run 00UTC All Romanian stations Top left – Percent correct Top middle-Probability of detection Top right – Hansen -Kupiels Skill Score Bottom left – Heidke Skill Score Bottom middle - False alarm ratio Bottom right – GSS – Gilbert's SKILL Score

COSMO-RO 7km resolution - 54 forecast hour 6H-Cumuleted precipitation -July 2011 run 00UTC All Romanian stations Top left – Percent correct Top middle-Probability of detection Top right – Hansen -Kupiels Skill Score Bottom left – Heidke Skill Score Bottom middle - False alarm ratio Bottom right – GSS – Gilbert's SKILL Score