1. WG5 COSMO General Meeting, Rome 2011 Authors: ALL Presented by Adriano Raspanti

2. WG5 COSMO General Meeting, Rome 2011 Quick look to some common plots Intercomparison between driving model and high resolution Conditional verification Fuzzy verification Long term trends (mainly precipitation)

3. TEMPERATURE AT 2 M - SON 2010 - MAM 2011

4. MEAN SEA LEVEL PRESSURE - SON 2010 – MAM 2011

5. Grafikinhalte BC from GME CEU,CPL,CRU !!! BC from IFS C7,CI7,CGR !!! BC from GME ??? BC from IFS ???

6. WIND SPEED AT 10 M - SON 2010 - MAM 2011

7. TOTAL CLOUD COVER - SON 2010 - MAM 2011

8. WG5 COSMO General Meeting, Rome 2011 Quick look to some common plots Intercomparison between driving model and high resolution Conditional verification Fuzzy verification Long term trends (mainly precipitation)

9. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 COSMOME vs ECMWF Temperature SON MAM DJF JJA

10. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 COSMOME vs ECMWF Wind Speed SON JJA MAM DJF

11. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 COSMOI7 vs ECMWF Temperature SON JJA MAM DJF

12. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 COSMOI7 vs ECMWF Wind Speed SON JJA MAM DJF

13. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 Temperature COSMOME vs COSMOIT SON JJA MAM DJF

14. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 Wind Speed COSMOME vs COSMOIT SON JJA MAM DJF

15. Temp 2m - 7km vs 3km WG5 COSMO General Meeting, Rome 2011 FallWinter SpringSummer Underestimation of Temp, mainly in winter. error ~2 o, worse with 7km by ~0.5 o Clear diurnal cycle

16. Wind Speed - 7km vs 3km FallWinter SpringSummer Overestimation of wind (DJF,SON) 2-2.5deg bias similar attitude of 2 models WG5 COSMO General Meeting, Rome 2011

17. 17 Verification results at MeteoSwiss in 2011 COSMO GM / WG5 Parallel Session, 05.09.2011 Precipitation (12h-sums +36 to +48h): Spring 2011 over Switzerland (SYNOP‘s) frequency bias: COSMO-7 & IFS observed frequency V. Stauch

18. 18 Verification results at MeteoSwiss in 2011 COSMO GM / WG5 Parallel Session, 05.09.2011 Precipitation (12h-sums +12 to +24h): Spring 2011 over Switzerland (SYNOP‘s) COSMO-7 & COSMO-2 V. Stauch for both models mean over 9 gridpoints for each station

19. T2m COSMO-RU 2.2 and 7 km, Sochi, station Krasnaya Polyana 19 2.2 km – Less overestimating 7 km

20. T2m in COSMO-RU 7 and 2.2 km, Krasnaya Polyana 20 Method: 1) nearest point 3D optimized ! COSMO-RU 2.2 km is better than COSMO-RU 7 km for Krasnaya Polyana

21. T2m in COSMO-RU 7 and 2.2 km, Moscow 21 Method: 1) nearest point 3D optimized ! COSMO-RU 2.2 km RMSE is even slightly higher than that of COSMO-RU 7 km for Moscow

22. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 PERFORMANCE DIAGRAM Period March 2010 - April 2011

23. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 50% of points (median) > 1 mm/24h

24. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 50% of points (median) > 5 mm/24h

25. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 50% of points (median) > 10 mm/24h

26. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 50% of points (median) > 20 mm/24h

27. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 1 Point (maximum) > 1 mm/24h

28. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 1 Point (maximum) > 5 mm/24h

29. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 1 Point (maximum) > 10 mm/24h

30. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 1 Point (maximum) > 20 mm/24h

31. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 50% of points (median) > 1 mm/24h & Maximum > 25 mm/24h

32. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 50% of points (median) > 1 mm/24h & Maximum > 50 mm/24h

33. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 50% of points (median) > 1 mm/24h & Maximum > 75 mm/24h

34. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 50% of points (median) > 1 mm/24h & Maximum > 100 mm/24h

35. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 50% of points (median) > 5 mm/24h & Maximum > 25 mm/24h

36. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 50% of points (median) > 5 mm/24h & Maximum > 50 mm/24h

37. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 50% of points (median) > 5 mm/24h & Maximum > 75 mm/24h

38. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 50% of points (median) > 5 mm/24h & Maximum > 100 mm/24h

39. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 50% of points (median) > 10 mm/24h & Maximum > 25 mm/24h

40. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 50% of points (median) > 10 mm/24h & Maximum > 50 mm/24h

41. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 50% of points (median) > 10 mm/24h & Maximum > 75 mm/24h

42. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 50% of points (median) > 10 mm/24h & Maximum > 100 mm/24h

43. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 50% of points (median) > 20 mm/24h & Maximum > 25 mm/24h

44. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 50% of points (median) > 20 mm/24h & Maximum > 50 mm/24h

45. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 50% of points (median) > 20 mm/24h & Maximum > 75 mm/24h

46. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 50% of points (median) > 20 mm/24h & Maximum > 75 mm/24h

47. WG5 COSMO General Meeting, Rome 2011 Quick look to some common plots Intercomparison between driving model and high resolution Conditional verification Fuzzy verification Long term trends (mainly precipitation)

48. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 Conditional Verification Temp – TCC obs <=25% SON MAM DJF JJA Better behaviour for all the seasons Compare to no condition model

49. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 Conditional Verification Temp – TCC obs >=75%&Wind Speed (obs) <=2 m/s SON MAM DJF JJA Similar. Differences in bias

50. COSMO General Meeting – Roma 05-09 Sept 2011 Conditional Verification Temp – TCC obs <=25%&Wind Speed (obs) <=2 m/s SON MAM DJF JJA Similar. Differences in bias

51. 2mT vs 2mT in overcast conditions 2mT overcast/no wind FallWinter SpringSummer

52. 2mT vs 2mT in skyclear conditions 2mT skyclear/no wind FallWinter SpringSummer

53. CAPE>50CAPE<50 Very high POD values for unstable conditions, FAR not so different

54. WG5 COSMO General Meeting, Rome 2011 WS - Z0>0.25 WS - Z0<0.25 Wind Speed with respect to Roughness Length Strong underestimation of wind in positions with small roughness length and increased error

55. WG5 COSMO General Meeting, Rome 2011 Td, 2mT – dry soilTd, 2mT – wet soil W_SO Water content of first soil layer(kg/m2) 1cm. Td: Higher error in dry soil and larger underestimation 2mT: Higher error in wet soil and larger understimation

56. WG5 COSMO General Meeting, Rome 2011 Quick look to some common plots Intercomparison between driving model and high resolution Conditional verification Fuzzy verification Long term trends (mainly precipitation)

57. 57 Verification results at MeteoSwiss in 2011 COSMO GM / WG5 Parallel Session, 05.09.2011 results for 2010 3h accumulated precipitation sums over the domain of the swiss radar composit models: COSMO-2 and COSMO-7 for all 8 daily forecast runs, precipitation sums from +3 to +6h observation precipitation estimates of the swiss radar composit in case of a missing value, the full date will not be evaluated Neighborhood verification for precipitation

58. 58 Verification results at MeteoSwiss in 2011 COSMO GM / WG5 Parallel Session, 05.09.2011 FSS, COSMO-2 minus COSMO-7, 2010 WinterSpring Autumn Summer numbers = FSS-Score of COSMO-2 colours = differences COSMO-2 minus COSMO-7 COSMO-2 better COSMO-7 better COSMO-2: similar skill in all seasons COSMO-2 better than COSMO-7 on almost all scales COSMO-2 better than COSMO-7 especially in Winter and Summer Tanja Weusthoff

59. 59 Verification results at MeteoSwiss in 2011 COSMO GM / WG5 Parallel Session, 05.09.2011 3. „Fuzzy in Time“ Extension of the spatial window with a window in time  volume (dx * dy * dt) Evaluation of the forecasts in this volume Time-window ntm = [1h,3h,5h,7h,9h] dt dx dy T. Weusthoff

60. 60 Verification results at MeteoSwiss in 2011 COSMO GM / WG5 Parallel Session, 05.09.2011 dx dy dx dy model observation e.g. FSS fraction blue pxiels model = 12/75 (dt=3), 5/25 (dt=1) fraction blue pxiels obs = 12/75 (dt=3), 3/25 (dt=1) t0 t0-1 t0+1 t0 t0-1 t0+1 T. Weusthoff

61. 61 Verification results at MeteoSwiss in 2011 COSMO GM / WG5 Parallel Session, 05.09.2011 00010203040506070809101112131420212223 00-02 01-03 02-04 03-05 04-06 05-07 … 23-01 22-00 21-23 20-22 hourly accumulated precipitation Evaluation of 3h accumulations, time window ntm = 5 (t0 +-2h) 00 UTC03 UTC06 UTC08 UTC 22 UTC02 UTC 01 UTC05 UTC 3 hourly accumulated precipitation Evaluation of 3h accumulations, time window ntm = 1 09 UTC00 UTC03 UTC06 UTC 23 UTC01 UTC 02 UTC04 UTC T. Weusthoff

62. 62 Verification results at MeteoSwiss in 2011 COSMO GM / WG5 Parallel Session, 05.09.2011 FSS for different time-windows COSMO-2, July 2010 T. Weusthoff

63. 63 Verification results at MeteoSwiss in 2011 COSMO GM / WG5 Parallel Session, 05.09.2011 T. Weusthoff FSS for different time-windows COSMO-7, July 2010

64. 64 Verification results at MeteoSwiss in 2011 COSMO GM / WG5 Parallel Session, 05.09.2011 FSS for different time-windows COSMO-2 minus COSMO-7, July 2010 T. Weusthoff

65. 65 Verification results at MeteoSwiss in 2011 COSMO GM / WG5 Parallel Session, 05.09.2011 Summary „fuzzy in time“ FSS increases on all scales with increasing time-window greatest effect for small spatical scales lowest effect for high threshods Both models show a similar increase difference COSMO-2 minus COSMO-7 stays equal, resp. becomes littler for high time-windows For Upscaling the influence of a time tolerance is relatively low und restricted on low thresholds (  effect of the avergaing)  Application of time-windows on the gridscale would make sense; simultaneous application with space tolerance brings no great change T. Weusthoff

66. Ulrich Damrath: Fuzzy and standard verification for COSMO-EU and COSMO-DE, COSMO GM, Rome September 2011 Configuration of precipitation verification with FUZZY- methods  Up to May 2011:  Observation data: Radar data prepared by assimilation scheme  Model data: GME-, CEU- and CDE-GRIBS interpolated to CDE-grid (nearest gridpoint)  Run: 00 UTC  Forecast times: GME, CEU: 06-18, 06-30, CDE: 06-18 hours  Verification area: part of CDE that is covered by radar data  Since May 2011:  Observation data as before, modell data: CEU- and CDE-GRIBS interpolated to CDE-grid (nearest gridpoint)  Run: 00, 03, 06, 09, 12, 15, 18, 21  Forecast times: 01-04, 03-06, 06-12, 12-15, 15-18, 18-21 hours  Verification aread : CDE, Northern part of Germany, Southern part of Germany, North- Western part of Germany, North-Eastern part of Germany, South-Western part of Germany, South-Eastern part of Germany

67. Ulrich Damrath: Fuzzy and standard verification for COSMO-EU and COSMO-DE, COSMO GM, Rome September 2011 Application of Fuzzy-methods  Calculation of all Fuzzy-scores with the IDL-Program by Beth Ebert.  Monthly evaluation of data for Fractions Skill Score and Upscaling ETS  Generation of results for  8 (forecast runs)  * 7 (forecast intervals)  * 3 (2 models and one difference)  * 7 (regions)  * 2 (scores) --------------------------------------------- 2352 Plots per time interval  Necessity to have a fast access to the data

68. Ulrich Damrath: Fuzzy and standard verification for COSMO-EU and COSMO-DE, COSMO GM, Rome September 2011 Some examples: ETS upscaling July 2011, Run: 00 UTC, forecast time 01-04 hours

69. Ulrich Damrath: Fuzzy and standard verification for COSMO-EU and COSMO-DE, COSMO GM, Rome September 2011 Some examples : FSS July 2011, Run: 00 UTC, forecast time 01-04 hours

70. Ulrich Damrath: Fuzzy and standard verification for COSMO-EU and COSMO-DE, COSMO GM, Rome September 2011 Some examples : ETS upscaling July 2011, Run: 00 UTC, forecast time 12-15 hours

71. Ulrich Damrath: Fuzzy and standard verification for COSMO-EU and COSMO-DE, COSMO GM, Rome September 2011 Some examples : FSS July 2011, Run: 00 UTC, forecast time 12-15 hours

72. Ulrich Damrath: Fuzzy and standard verification for COSMO-EU and COSMO-DE, COSMO GM, Rome September 2011 Some examples : ETS upscaling July 2011, Run: 00 UTC, forecast time 18-21 hours

73. Ulrich Damrath: Fuzzy and standard verification for COSMO-EU and COSMO-DE, COSMO GM, Rome September 2011 Some examples : FSS July 2011, Run: 00 UTC, forecast time 18-21 hours

74. WG5 COSMO General Meeting, Rome 2011 Quick look to some common plots Intercomparison between driving model and high resolution Conditional verification Fuzzy verification Long term trends (mainly precipitation)

75. Ulrich Damrath: Fuzzy and standard verification for COSMO-EU and COSMO-DE, COSMO GM, Rome September 2011 COSI @ DWD

76. Ulrich Damrath: Fuzzy and standard verification for COSMO-EU and COSMO-DE, COSMO GM, Rome September 2011 COSI @ DWD

77. Ulrich Damrath: Fuzzy and standard verification for COSMO-EU and COSMO-DE, COSMO GM, Rome September 2011 COSI @ DWD

78. Ulrich Damrath: Fuzzy and standard verification for COSMO-EU and COSMO-DE, COSMO GM, Rome September 2011 COSI @ DWD

79. Seasonal trend 0.2mm/24h + ECMWF All the versions present a seasonal cycle with an overestimation during summertime (except COSMO-7 and I2) COSMO-7 and I2 underestimate Overestimation error decreases in D+2 (spin-up effect vanished) Latest summer  worsening EU and I2 Dataset: high resolution network of rain gauges coming from COSMO dataset and Civil Protection Department  1300 stations Method: 24h/6h averaged cumulated precipitation value over 90 meteo-hydrological basins

80. Seasonal trend 20mm/24h + ECMWF Slight bias reduction during latest seasons winter 2010: all the versions overestimate (probably due to lack of representativene ss of the rain gauges over the plain during snowfall) Strong COSMO-7 underestimation BUT slight improvement during latest seasons General underestimation during latest seasons exc. I7

81. Seasonal trend 0.2mm/24h + ECMWF Very light improvement trend Seasonal error cycle: lower ets during winter and summertime no significant differences between D+1 and D+2 winter 2010 (very snowy particularly in Northern Italy): low ets value (D+1 and D+2)  model error or lack of representativeness of the rain gauges over the plain during snowfall ?

82. Seasonal trend 20mm/24h + ECMWF Low values during summertime (in general) All the versions present two “big jump” at jja08 and jja09, after the values increase and become quite stationary Skill decreases with forecast time