1. IASC Workshop Potsdamr, Germany Polar Meteorology Group, Byrd Polar Research Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA The Arctic System Reanalysis and Polar WRF Keith M. Hines Polar Meteorology Group Byrd Polar Research Center The Ohio State University Columbus, OH, USA

2. IASC Workshop Potsdamr, Germany Polar Meteorology Group, Byrd Polar Research Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA Arctic System Reanalysis An IPY Project A physically-consistent data assimilation of Arctic and other Northern Hemisphere data Participants: Ohio State University - Byrd Polar Research Center (BPRC) - and Ohio Supercomputer Center (OSC) National Center Atmospheric Research (NCAR) University of Colorado-Boulder University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign High resolution in space (10 km) and time (3 hours) Begin with years 2000-2010 (Earth Observing System) Now scheduled to finish ~September 2012

3. IASC Workshop Potsdamr, Germany Polar Meteorology Group, Byrd Polar Research Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA Domain for ASR Domain

4. IASC Workshop Potsdamr, Germany Polar Meteorology Group, Byrd Polar Research Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA Precipitation Yearly Total 2007, Unit: cm ASR ERA ERA-Interim

5. IASC Workshop Potsdamr, Germany Polar Meteorology Group, Byrd Polar Research Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA The data used for the surface statistics: NCEP FNL ERA-Interim Surface stations (More than 12,000 obtained from the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) and Greenland Climate Network (GC-NET))

6. IASC Workshop Potsdamr, Germany Polar Meteorology Group, Byrd Polar Research Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA 60-km ASR Temperature Biases for 2007

7. IASC Workshop Potsdamr, Germany Polar Meteorology Group, Byrd Polar Research Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA Polar WRF for WRF Version 3.2.1 Tar file supplement to WRF Version 3.2.1 (August 2010) Specified variable sea ice thickness (ASR-inspired) Specified variable snow depth on sea ice (ASR-inspired) 2 sfc temperature calculation options for permanent ice Sea ice albedo seasonal specifications (ASR-inspired) Sea Ice fraction initialization (AMSR-E, bootstrap, Chapman) Sea Ice thickness initialization (Chapman ASR dataset) MYNN surface layer now works with fractional sea ice Sea ice fraction is standard WRF option for Noah or RUC Distributed to 70+ scientific community users Coming to WRF 3.3 November 2011 Chapman T-based sea ice albedo

8. IASC Workshop Potsdamr, Germany Polar Meteorology Group, Byrd Polar Research Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA Polar WRF Test Domains 141 x 111 pts 25 km spacing 28 levels ARM/NSA SHEBA LTER (Kuparuk) LTER (BNZ) Observing Sites 97 x 139 24 km spacing 28 levels ASR domain 30 km, 60 km 121 x 121 60 km spacing 28 levels AMPS Grids

9. IASC Workshop Potsdamr, Germany Polar Meteorology Group, Byrd Polar Research Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA Verification for Polar WRF 3.1.1 60-km Grid

10. IASC Workshop Potsdamr, Germany Polar Meteorology Group, Byrd Polar Research Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA Monthly mean 2-m T biases, root mean squared differences, and correlation coefficients for a) Mid-latitude region and b) Polar region. Correlation coefficients are also provided for the non-coastal Polar region stations (NC). The left hand scale applies to bias and RMSD while the scale on the right is for correlation. Bias RMSD Correlation

11. IASC Workshop Potsdamr, Germany Polar Meteorology Group, Byrd Polar Research Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA

12. IASC Workshop Potsdamr, Germany Polar Meteorology Group, Byrd Polar Research Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA

13. IASC Workshop Potsdamr, Germany Polar Meteorology Group, Byrd Polar Research Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA

14. IASC Workshop Potsdamr, Germany Polar Meteorology Group, Byrd Polar Research Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA Summary  The Arctic System Reanalysis benefits from assimilation and verification with thousands of Arctic observations over land  Polar WRF benefits from many Arctic land stations for verification  Both are of less determined quality over the Arctic Ocean due to the limited number of observations  Use reanalyses for verification?  Determination of model errors?