a.montani; the cosmo-leps system. cosmo-leps and cosmo-s14-eps: what is old, what is new. andrea...

A.Montani; The COSMO-LEPS system.

COSMO-LEPS and COSMO-S14-EPS:

what is old, what is new.

Andrea Montani,

C. Marsigli, T. Paccagnella

ARPA-SIMC

HydroMeteoClimate Regional Service of Emilia-Romagna, Bologna,

Italy

COSMO General meetingSibiu, 2-5 September 2013


Outline

• Present status of COSMO-LEPS: about the operational verification, about the calibrated precipitation, about the convection schemes, about the clustering technique, about the future plans.

• Present status of COSMO-S14-EPS: about the main features, about case-study assessment, about the plans.


COSMO-LEPS suite @ ECMWF: present status

d-1d-1 dd d+5d+5d+1d+1 d+2d+2 d+4d+4d+3d+3

older EPSolder EPS

younger EPSyounger EPS

clustering clustering periodperiod

0000

1212

Cluster Analysis and RM identificationCluster Analysis and RM identification

4 variables4 variables

Z U V QZ U V Q

3 levels3 levels

500 700 850 hPa500 700 850 hPa

2 2 time time stepssteps


European European areaarea

Complete Complete LinkageLinkage

16 Representative Members driving the 16

COSMO-model integrations (weighted according to the cluster

populations)

using either Tiedtke or Kain-Fristch convection scheme (members 1-8 T,

members 9-16 KF) +

perturbations in turbulence scheme and

in physical parameterisations

COSMO-LEPS

clustering area

• suite runs twice a day (00 and 12UTC) as a “time-critical application” managed by ARPA-SIMC;

• Δx ~ 7 km; 40 ML; fc+132h;• COSM0 v4.26 since Jan 2013;• computer time (50 million

BUs for 2013) provided by the ECMWF member states in COSMO.

COSMO-LEPS

Integration Domain


Main changes during the COSMO year

• 16 January 2013: COSMO upgrade: 4.21 4.26;

int2lm upgrade: 1.18 1.20.

• 17 January 2013: operational dissemination implemented for ARPA-Veneto.

• 22 January 2013, technical changes at ECMWF:

• change of ECMWF super-computer and of the user running the suite: itm zcl;

• introduction of a new “dissemination stream” for COSMO-LEPS: “ad-hoc” initial and boundary conditions do not have to be retrieved any more, but are prepared on a dedicated file system; product dissemination starts about 40 minutes earlier than before (at 9UTC and 21UTC).

• 7 May 2013: enriched test dissemination implemented for HNMS.

• 13 May 2013: in the framework of GEOWOW research project, COSMO-LEPS was the first system (!!!) to populate TIGGE-LAM archive at ECMWF (high-priority parameters in grib2 format).

• 25 June 2013: tests with Fieldextra 11.1.0 started.


Outline

• Present status of COSMO-LEPS: about the operational verification,


– SYNOP on the GTS

Time-series verification of COSMO-LEPS

Main features:

variable: 12h cumulated precip (18-06, 06-18

UTC);

period : from Dec 2002 to Jul 2013;

region: 43-50N, 2-18E (MAP D-PHASEPHASE

area);

method: nearest grid point; no-weighted fcst;

obs: synop reports (about 470

stations/day);

fcst ranges: 6-18h, 18-30h, …, 102-114h, 114-126h;

thresholds: 1, 5, 10, 15, 25, 50 mm/12h;

system: COSMO-LEPS;

scores: ROC area, BSS, RPSS, Outliers, …

both monthly and seasonal scores were computed


Time series of ROC area (6-month running mean)

Area under the curve in the HIT rate vs FAR diagram; the higher, the better …Valuable forecast systems have ROC area values > 0.6.

Highest scores in the 2nd part of 2011 and, for the highest threshold, in 2013.

Drier seasons during 2011 and 2012 with few heavy-precipitation events: limited significance of the results for the 15mm threshold.

fc 30-42h: ROC area is high for last winter and spring. Positive trend can be noticed.

fc 78-90h: the best scores date back to the end of 2011.

Limited loss of predictability with increasing forecast range.


Outline

• Present status of COSMO-LEPS: about operational verification (time-series scores show improvements),

about the calibrated precipitation;


about calibrated precipitation

• For each COSMO-LEPS member, calibrated precipitation is operationally generated over Germany, Switzerland and Emilia-Romagna; the calibration technique is based on CDF-based corrections, making use of COSMO-LEPS reforecast.

• For MAM2013, inter-comparison between raw and calibrated 24h TP forecast.Main features:

variable: 24h cumulated precip (06-06 UTC);

period : DJF 2012-13 and MAM 2013;

region: Germany, Switzerland, Emilia-

Romagna;

method: nearest grid point; no-weighted fcst;

obs: synop reports (about 300 stations/day);

fcst ranges: 18-42h, 42-66h, 66-90h, 90-114h;

thresholds: 1, 5, 10, 15, 25, 50 mm/12h;

system: opecleps and Calibcleps;

scores: ROC area, BSS, RPSS, Outliers, RelDiag, …


opecleps vs Calibclepsfc 42-66h; 10mm/24h


Outline


about calibration (positive impact, especially over Emilia-Romagna!);

about convection schemes,

members 1-8 use Tiedtke convection scheme (8TD),

members 9-16 use Kain-Fritsch (8KF).

MAM 2013: compare cleps16, 8TD, 8KF.


about the convection scheme

BSS, tp > 1mm

ROC, tp > 10mm

ROC, tp > 1mm

BSS, tp > 10mm

• As expected, best performance by the full ensemble (cleps16).• Tiedtke-members better than Kain-Fritsch members, but NOT for

all scores.

___ cleps16___ 8TD ___ 8KF


Outline

• Present status of COSMO-LEPS:about operational verification (time-series scores show improvements);

about calibration (positive impact, especially over Emilia-Romagna!);

about convection schemes (Tiedtke slightly superior to Kain-Fritsch);

about the clustering technique


about the clustering technique

• Consider distances between ECMWF EPS members according to “COSMO-LEPS metric” (Z, U, V, Q in the mid-lower troposphere over the clustering domain).

• Look at distances between pairs of ECMWF EPS members: to what extent do these distances grow with forecast range, using “COSMO-LEPS metric”?

• Study a number of seasons.• Compare against random choice. Outcome: modifications to the number of clusters / number of EPS

considered / clustering intervals.

AIM: provide limited-area ensembles (either convection-parameterised or convection-permitting) with the best set of boundary conditions.


Outline


about calibration (clear positive impact of calibration);

about convection schemes (Tiedtke slightly superior to Kain-Fritsch);

about the clustering technique (work in progress);

about the future plans.


• Adapt COSMO-LEPS suite to ECWMF forthcoming upgrades:– increase of vertical resolution in ECMWF-EPS: 62 91;

– change of Member-State server: ecaccess ecgb;

– change of super-computer: IBM Cray;

• Carry on study about the clustering methodology.

• Increase of COSMO-LEPS vertical resolution (40 50ML): tests start in October.

• LAMEPS_BC project: test with high-resolution ECMWF-EPS boundaries start by

the end of 2013.

• Analysis of the performance of COSMO-HYBEPS (COSMO-LEPS + 2-3 COSMO

runs nested on IFS/GME/GFS).

• Strengthen links with Fieldextra.

about the future plans

Any request for modifications to the present configuration of COSMO-LEPS?


Outline

• Present status of COSMO-S14-EPS: about the main features, about case-study assessment, about the plans.


Milestones of COSMO-S14-EPS

• 11/3/2011. Nothing present.

• 2/5/2011. Submission of a new ECMWF Special Project (Title: “Implementation of a limited-area ensemble prediction system for Sochi Olympic Games”; Project investigators: Majewski, Montani, Steiner; duration: 3 years) for provision of computer time to run the system on ECMWF super-computers;

• 5-9/9/2011. Discussion during the COSMO meeting about the system set-up;

• 6/12/2011. Approval of the Special Project by ECMWF Council;

• 6-9/12/2011. Visit of Russian colleagues at ARPA-SIMC to define specifics of the new ensemble system;

• 19/12/2011. Beginning of provision of COSMO-S14-EPS products on a daily basis.

• 1/11/2012. Initial conditions of soil fields (temperature, moisture, snow cover) are no more interpolated from ECMWF EPS, but provided by COSMO run in hindcast mode (approach already tested for COSMO-LEPS in 2011) .


COSMO-S14-EPS @ ECMWF: present status

d+3d+3dd d+2d+2d+1d+1

ECMWF EPS

clustering interval


4 variables

Z U V Q

3 levels

500 700 850 hPa

2 time steps


Black-Sea area

Complete Linkage

10 Representative Members driving the 10

COSMO-model integrations (weighted according to the cluster

populations)

employing either Tiedtke or Kain-Fristch

convection scheme (randomly choosen)

+perturbations in

turbulence scheme and in physical

parameterisations

clustering area

• Δx ~ 7 km; 40 ML; fc+72h;• initial time: 00/12 UTC;• computer time (~ 4.5 million

BUs for 2013) is provided by an ECMWF Special Project;

• contributions from Switzerland national allocation were needed;

• suite managed by ARPA-SIMC.

Integration Domain


Disseminated products

post-processing uses COSMO-software fieldextra:

probability fields for the exceedance of thresholds for surface fields;

ensemble mean and ensemble standard deviation for some fields;

individual ensemble member runs (ICs and BCs from 10 selected EPS members): start at 00UTC and 12UTC; t = 72h;

1 deterministic run (ICs and BCs from the deterministic ECMWF forecast) to “join” deterministic and probabilistic approaches: start at 00UTC and 12UTC; t = 72h;

provision of hourly boundary conditions (from fc+0h to fc+48h) for convective-resolving ensemble (RDP part);

provision of hourly boundary conditions (from fc+0h to fc+48h) for higher-resolution deterministic modelling (RDP part).


Outline

• Present status of COSMO-S14-EPS: about the main features, about case-study assessment,


Case-study assessment

1. Heavy-precipitation event on 13 Jan 2013: 21 mm of rain during the day on the coast (Sochi/Adler) and 33 mm of snow-water equivalent during the day in the mountain (Krasnaya Polyana);

2. Foehn event on 14-15 Feb 2013: a sudden 10-degree warming, which forecasters regard as hardly predictable.

Sochi local time = UTC + 4 hours

UTC= Sochi local time – 4 hours

The fields of the next slides are operationally delivered to FROST-server


Heavy precipitation event (1)

OBS: 21 mm of rain during the day on the coast (Sochi/Adler) and 33 mm of snow-water equivalent during the day in the mountain (Krasnaya Polyana)

runs start at 00UTC of 11/1/2013 and verify at 12UTC of 13/1/2013

(fc+48-60h)

sfp12h_gt_15cm

tpp12h_gt_20mm

rain12h_gt_20mm





(fc+36-48h)

tpp12h_gt_20mm

rain12h_gt_20mm sfp12h_gt_15cm





(fc+24-36h)

rain12h_gt_20mm sfp12h_gt_15cm

tpp12h_gt_20mm


Heavy precipitation event: consistency


Fix event (probability of 12h snowfall exceeding 15 mm of equivalent water) and verification time (12UTC of 13/1/2013): consider model runs with different forecast ranges.

fc +48-60h

fc +36-48h fc +24-36h


Outline

• Present status of COSMO-S14-EPS:about the main features, about case-study assessment (good performance of the system),

about the plans.


• “Survive” ECMWF upgrades (increase of vertical resolution, change

of member-state server, change of super-computer).

• Develop new products “on demand” (in the next weeks, “multi-

model” ensemble products will be tested).

• Use good-quality observations at high resolution (and there are) to

perform statistical verification.

about the plans

•To what extent are forecasters

using COSMO-S14-EPS products?

•How to strengthen links between

forecasters and ensemble

developers?

training with forecasters in Sochi next October


Thank you !

European Conference on Applications of Meteorology / EMS annual meeting

09 – 13 September 2013, Reading (UK)

Session NWP4 (on 13 September): Probabilistic and ensemble forecasting at short and and medium-range

http://www.ems2013.net/home.html


Extra slides on configuration


Dim

2

Initial conditions Dim 1

Dim

2

Possible evolution scenarios

Dim 1 Initial conditions

ensemble size reduction

Cluster members chosen as representative members (RMs)

LAM integrations driven byRMs

LAM scenario

LAM scenario

LAM scenario

COSMO-LEPS methodologyCOSMO-LEPS methodology


COSMO-HYBrid Ensemble Prediction System

From the results of CONSENS PP, come to a synthesis with the different ensemble systems / strategies, considering scientific, implementation, solidity aspects.

Generate 20-member hybrid ensemble (COSMO-HYBEPS) , where:

a) 16 members comes from COSMO-LEPS,

b) 1 member is nested on IFS (uses Tiedtke scheme),

c) 1 member is nested on IFS (uses Kain-Fritsch scheme),

d) 1 member is nested on GME,

e) 1 member is nested on GFS.

already existing taken from CONSENS.

All members have Δx ~ 7 km; 40 ML; fc+132h;

Study performance of different members’ combinations with the same ensemble size.

“20-members esuite” implemented on 7/9/2012;

will be run up to the end of the year


COSMO-LEPS (developed at ARPA-SIM)

• What is it?It is a Limited-area Ensemble Prediction System (LEPS),

based on COSMO-model and implemented within COSMO (COnsortium for Small-scale MOdelling, which includes Germany, Greece, Italy, Poland, Romania, Switzerland).

• Why?It was developed to combine the advantages of global-

model ensembles with the high-resolution details gained by the LAMs, so as to identify the possible occurrence of severe and localised weather events (heavy rainfall, strong winds, temperature anomalies, snowfall, …)

generation of COSMO-LEPS to improve the Late-Short (48hr) to Early-Medium (132hr) range forecast of

severe weather events.


Operational set-up

Core products:16 perturbed COSMO-model runs (ICs and 3-

hourly BCs from 16 EPS members) to generate, “via weights”, probabilistic output: start at 12UTC; t = 132h;

Additional products: 1 deterministic run (ICs and 3-hourly BCs from the

high-resolution deterministic ECMWF forecast) to “join” deterministic and probabilistic approaches: start at 12UTC; t = 132h;

1 hindcast (or proxy) run (ICs and 3-hourly BCs from ECMWF analyses) to “downscale” ECMWF information: start at 00UTC; t = 36h.


Types of perturbations

As for types and values, the results from CSPERT experimentation

were followed (* denotes default values for COSMO v4.26 ):

•convection_scheme: Tiedtke* (members 1-8), Kain-Fritsch (members 9-16),

•tur_len (either 150, or 500*, or 1000),

•pat_len (either 500*, or 2000),

•crsmin (either 50, or 150*, or 200),

•rat_sea (either 1, or 20*, or 40),

•rlam_heat (either 0.1, or 1*, or 5),

•mu_rain : either 0.5* (with rain_n0_factor =0.1) or 0 (with rain_n0_factor =1.0),

•cloud_num (either 5x10^8* or 5x10^7).

• convection scheme: T=Tiedtke KF=Kain-Fritsch;

• tur_len: maximal turbulent length scale (default 500m); this parameter is used mainly in the

calculation of the characteristic length scale for vertical mixing and thus into the calculation of

the vertical transport momentum coefficient;

• pat_len: length scale of thermal surface patterns (default 500m); this parameter is mainly

used in the calculation of the large-scale part of the equation addressing the heat flux

parameterisation; horizontal length;

• rlam_heat: scaling factor of the laminar layer depth (default 1); it defines the layer with non-

turbulent characteristics (molecular diffusion effects only);

• rat_sea: ratio of laminar scaling factors for heat over sea (default 20);

• crsmin: minimal stomata resistance (default 150);

• Cloud_num: Cloud droplet number concentration;

• Mu_rain: Exponent of the raindrop size distribution;

•( gscp: Switch on/off of the graupel scheme).


Main results

Time-series verificationECMWF EPS changed substantially in the last years (more and more weight to EDA-

based perturbations) and it is hard to disentangle improvements related to COSMO-

LEPS upgrades from those due to better boundaries; nevertheless:– high values of BSS and ROC area for the probabilistic prediction of 12-h precipitation for

autumn 2011;

– poor performance in the first months of 2012, then recovery. Need to investigate what

happened.

Case-study verificationConsistent signal for different forecast ranges of a high-impact weather event for the

snowfalls of February 2012.


Extra slides on COSMO-S14-EPS


Important ingredients (from 1st and 2nd FROST meetings)

1. Provide reasonable “numbers”. addressed

2. Develop experience with probabilities. ?

3. Feedback on the top-priority products. being addressed

4. Snow analysis. ?

5. Soil-field initialisation. addressed

6. High-res obs to assess the quality of the system. being addressed

7. Computer time. addressed

8. Timeliness in product delivery. addressed

9. ......

anything to add/remove?


FROST-2014 vs SOCHMEL

1) Introduction to FROST-2014:

a) What is it?

b) What has to do with COSMO?

2) COSMO ensemble activities within FROST-2014:

a) introduction to SOCHMEL (the SOCHi-targeted Mesoscale EnsembLe system)

b) methodology;

c) phases of development;

d) planned activity.

3) Final remarks.


Extra slides on verification


Seasonal scores of ROC and BSS: last 4 springs

Fixed event (“12h precip > 10mm”): consider the performance of the system for increasing forecast ranges.

Valuable forecast systems have ROC area values > 0.6 and BSS > 0.

Need to take into account the different statistics for each season (MAM 2011 was the driest).

Best performance for the spring 2011 and 2013, but less marked diurnal cycle in 2013.

Spring 2013: BSS is positive for all forecast ranges

Similar results for the other thresholds (not shown).


Outliers: time series + ………seas scores (DJF)?

How many times the analysis is out of the forecast interval spanned by the ensemble members. … the lower the better … Performance of the system assessed as time series and for the last 4 winters.

Evident seasonal cycle (more outliers in winter).

Overall reduction of outliers in the years up to 2007; then, again in 2009 and 2010, but later.

Need to take into account the different statistics for each season.

In the short range, best results for winter 2010-2011.

For longer ranges, the performance of the system is “stable”.

Outliers before 10% from day 3 onwards.


Time series of Brier Skill ScoreBSS is written as 1-BS/BSref. Sample climate is the reference system. Useful forecast systems if

BSS > 0.BS measures the mean squared difference between forecast and observation in probability

space. BS equivalent to MSE for deterministic forecast. DA FINIREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

fc 30-42h: very good scores in 2010 and 2011; BSS positive for all thresholds since April 2009; fewer and fewer problems with high thresholds.

fc 78-90h: good trend in 2010 and 2011 for all thresholds.

In the last months, “spread” in BSS values for the different threshold values, possibly due to the lack of events.

Month-to-month variability is higher than for the ROC area.


Seasonal scores of BSS: ……last 4 winters

Fixed event (“12h precip > 10mm”): consider the performance of the system for increasing forecast ranges.

Fixed forecast range (fc 30-42h): consider the performance of the system for increasing thresholds.Need to take into account the different statistics for each season (last DJF was the driest).

Fixed event: best performance for the last two winters (ECMWF EPS had a record performance for winter 2009-2010): BSS positive for all forecast ranges.

Fixed forecast range: similar results as before.

Similar results for longer forecast ranges and for higher thresholds.


Ranked Probability Skill Score: time series + …….. seasonal scores (MAM)

A sort of BSS “cumulated” over all thresholds. RPSS is written as 1-RPS/RPSref. Sample climate is the reference system. RPS is the extension of the Brier Score to the multi-event situation.

Useful forecast systems for RPSS > 0. Performance of the system assessed as time series and for the last 4 springs (MAM).

the increase of the COSMO-LEPS skill is detectable for 3 out of 4 forecast ranges along the years, BUT

low skill in the first months of 2012 (the problem comes from MAM), then recovery.Best results for MAM 2011; quick decrease of RPSS with fcst range for MAM 2012.


Bias and rmse of T2M Ensemble Mean

Consider bias (the closer to zero, the better) and rmse (the lower the better).

Bias closer to zero (0.5 °C of decrease) and lower rmse for the 7-km suite. The improvement is not “massive”, but detectable for all forecast ranges, especially for day-time

verification. The signal is stable (similar scores for 1-month or 3-month verification).Need to correct T2M forecasts with height to assess the impact more clearly.


Overestimation of Td2m and soil moisture (1)

Verification period: MAM07 and MAM08.

Obs: synop reports (about 470 stations x day).

Region: 43-50N, 2-18E (MAP D-PHASE area).

Larger bias and larger rmse in MAM08 rather than in MAM07 for COSMO-LEPS deterministic run (in 2007, no multi-layer soil model).


Score dependence on the domain size (1)

Verification of COSMO-LEPS against synop reports over the MAP D-PHASE area (~ 470 stations; MAPDOM) and the full domain (~ 1500 stations; fulldom):

different statistics of the verification samples; up to now, performance of the system over the 2 domains assessed only for 6

months (March-August 2007). difficult to draw general conclusions


Score dependence on the domain size (2)

RPSS

RPSS score… the higher the better… (and positive).

ROC area… the higher the better… (and above 0.6).Smoother transitions from month to month in “fulldom” scores.

Slightly better performance of COSMO-LEPS over the MAPDOM, but the signal varies from month to month.

Higher predictability with orographic forcing?

Need to check individual regions and/or to stratify for type of stations.

OUTL

ROC

Outliers percentage … the lower the better.


Semi-diurnal cycle in COSMO-LEPS scores

BSS score … the higher the better … Performance of the system assessed for 5 different Summers (JJA).

BSS Evident 12-hour cycle in

BSS scores (the same holds for RPSS, while less evident for ROC area scores).

Better performance of the system for “night-time” precipitation, that is for rainfall predicted between 18Z and 6Z (ranges 30-42h, 54-66h, …).

The amplitude of the cycle is somewhat reduced throughout the years and with increasing forecast range.

The bad performance in Summer 2006 is confirmed.


about eps16

Period: March 2013 (62 cases)

Variable: Z500 ensemble mean

Area: 60./-10./30./30.

Common negative bias (too cycclonic) The operational selection choice may not be the optimal one!


Extra slides on LAMEPS-BC


Test data for LAMEPS Boundary Conditions


Proposed region for archiving LAMEPS BC data


Outline

• Introduction:

migration to the 7-km system.

COSMO-LEPS 10 km (old)

COSMO-LEPS 7 km (new)


COSMO-LEPS

16-MEMBER EPS

51-MEMBER EPS

tp > 1mm/24h

tp > 5mm/24h

Average values (boxes 0.5 x 0.5)MAM06

As regards AVERAGE precipitation above these two threshols, the 3 systems have similar performance.


ENSEMBLE SIZE REDUCTIONIMPACT EVALUATED ON CASE STUDIES (1)


ENSEMBLE SIZE REDUCTIONIMPACT EVALUATED ON CASE STUDIES (2)

Observed precipitation between 15-11-2002 12UTC and 16-11-2002 12 UTC

Piedmont case


Why Limited Area Ensemble Prediction?

• Global Ensemble Prediction Systems

– have become extremely important tools to tackle the problem of predictions beyond day 2

– are usually run at a coarser resolution with respect to deterministic global predictions → skill in forecasting intense and localised events is currently still limited.


Why Limited Area Ensemble Prediction?(2)

As regards high resolution deterministic forecast in the short range, where limited-area models play the major role, a “satisfactory” QPF is still one of the major challenges. The same can be said for other local parameters.

This is due, among other reasons, to the inherently low degree of predictability typical of severe and localised events.

Probabilistic/Ensemble approach is so required also for the short range at higher resolution


In the last period the verification package is being developed keeping into account two measure of precipitation:

the cumulative volume of water deployed over a specific region

the rainfall peaks which occur within this region

OBJECTIVE VERIFICATION OF COSMO-LEPS

COSMO observations


CLEPS EPS

Verification grid

OBS MASK


COSMO-LEPS

16-MEMBER EPS

51-MEMBER EPS

tp > 1mm/24h

tp > 5mm/24h

Average values boxes 0.5x0.5 deg3 sis


COSMO-LEPS

16-MEMBER EPS

tp > 1mm/24h

NOCC=610

NOCC=1195

tp > 5mm/24h

NOCC=2671

tp > 10mm/24h

ave 0.5


Maximum values boxes 0.5x0.5 deg

tp > 1mm/24h

tp > 5mm/24h

tp > 10mm/24h

COSMO-LEPS

16-MEMBER EPS

51-MEMBER EPS

3 sis


COSMO-LEPS

16-MEMBER EPS

tp > 20mm/24hNOCC=227

Average values boxes 0.5x0.5 deg


COSMO-LEPS NW

COSMO-LEPS W

tp > 1mm/24h

COSMO-LEPS weighting procedure

maximum values (boxes 0.5x0.5 deg)


COSMO-LEPS_10 (Old) vs COSMO-LEPS_7 (New)

• Deterministic verification of T2M ensemble mean

Variable: 2-metre temperature. Period: from June to November 2009. Forecast ranges: fc+6h, fc+12h, …, fc+132h. Scores: root-mean-square error, bias.

• Probabilistic verification of 12-hour cumulated precipitation

Variable:12h cumulated precipitation (18-06, 06-18 UTC). Period: from June to November 2009. Forecast ranges: fc 6-18h, fc 18-30h, …, fc 114-126h. Scores: ROC area, BSS, RPSS, Outliers. Thresholds: 1, 5, 10, 15, 25, 50 mm/12h.

Observations: SYNOP reports over either MAP D-PHASE region (450 reports/day) or the FULL-DOMAIN (1400 reports/day).

Method: nearest grid point; no-weighted fcst.


Bias and rmse of T2M Ensemble Mean

Consider bias and rmse for 3 months (24/5 24/8/2009) over MAPDOM (∼ 450 synop). T2m forecasts are corrected with height.

Bias closer to zero and lower rmse for the 7-km suite. Improvement is not “massive”, but detectable for all forecast ranges, especially for day-time

verification.Similar results over MAPDOM and over FULLDOM (not shown). The signal is stable (same scores also for 6-month verification).

---- OLD rmse (10 km)---- NEW rmse (7 km)—— OLD bias (10 km)—— NEW bias (7 km)


COSMO-LEPS_10 (Old) vs COSMO-LEPS_7 (New)

• Deterministic verification of T2M ensemble mean

Variable: 2-metre temperature. Period: from June to November 2009. Forecast ranges: fc+6h, fc+12h, …, fc+132h. Scores: root-mean-square error, bias.

• Probabilistic verification of 12-hour cumulated precipitation

Variable:12h cumulated precipitation (18-06, 06-18 UTC). Period: from June to November 2009. Forecast ranges: fc 6-18h, fc 18-30h, …, fc 114-126h. Scores: ROC area, BSS, RPSS, Outliers. Thresholds: 1, 5, 10, 15, 25, 50 mm/12h.

Observations: SYNOP reports over either MAP D-PHASE region (450 reports/day) or the FULL-DOMAIN (1400 reports/day).

Method: nearest grid point; no-weighted fcst.


opecleps vs Calibcleps

fc 42-66h; 1mm/24h

fc 42-66h; 10mm/24h

a.montani; the cosmo-leps system. cosmo-leps and cosmo-s14-eps: what is old, what is new. andrea...

Documents

cosmoleps system

cosmoleps suite

cosmo upgrade

cosmo year16

cosmoleps integration

outlinepresent status

cosmomodel integrations

andrea montani