The Diurnal Cycle of Winter Season Temperature Errors in the Operational Global Forecast System (GFS)

Forecasts from NOAA's Global Forecast System (GFS) and the High‐Resolution Rapid Refresh (HRRR) weather models are matched to surface observations for the winter season of November 2019 to March 2020 at 210 airports across the United States. The 2‐m temperature errors, conditioned on observed w...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Geophysical research letters 2021-10, Vol.48 (20), p.n/a
Hauptverfasser: Patel, Ronak N., Yuter, Sandra E., Miller, Matthew A., Rhodes, Spencer R., Bain, Lily, Peele, Toby W.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page n/a
container_issue 20
container_start_page
container_title Geophysical research letters
container_volume 48
creator Patel, Ronak N.
Yuter, Sandra E.
Miller, Matthew A.
Rhodes, Spencer R.
Bain, Lily
Peele, Toby W.
description Forecasts from NOAA's Global Forecast System (GFS) and the High‐Resolution Rapid Refresh (HRRR) weather models are matched to surface observations for the winter season of November 2019 to March 2020 at 210 airports across the United States. The 2‐m temperature errors, conditioned on observed weather conditions such as cloud cover amount and wind speed, are used to determine the nature of systematic model biases. We observe a strong diurnal cycle in 2‐m temperature errors in the GFS in conditions with ≤50% and ≤25% sky cover, with a 1°C warm bias at night and a 2°C cold bias during the day. The HRRR, which uses a different set of physical parameterizations, does not have a clear diurnal cycle in errors under the same conditions. These results highlight the utility of weather‐conditional comparisons across the diurnal cycle to diagnose sources of model weaknesses and to target model improvements. Plain Language Summary We evaluate the output from weather forecast models compared to observations at 210 airports across the United States during the November 2019 to March 2020 winter season. We focus on near‐surface air temperature errors in the Global Forecast System (GFS) and High‐Resolution Rapid Refresh (HRRR) weather models for different times of day and subsets of observed weather conditions. The GFS is 1°C too warm at night and 2°C too cold during the day in conditions with ≤50% and ≤25% cloud cover. The daily high and low temperatures have smaller errors in the HRRR model, which has different algorithms than the GFS model. Model refinement and development efforts would benefit from a focus on accurate representation of the diurnal cycle of temperatures as this basic characteristic of weather can reveal strengths and weaknesses in the model physics. Key Points National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)'s global forecast system (GFS) model struggles to adequately represent the diurnal cycle of temperatures under observed conditions of ≤50% and 25% cloud cover NOAA's high‐resolution rapid refresh (HRRR) model uses a different physics suite and does not have a strong diurnal cycle of temperature errors under the same conditions Examination of errors using similar weather conditions helps to constrain the portion of model physics that can yield larger forecast errors
doi_str_mv 10.1029/2021GL095101
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>wiley_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1029_2021GL095101</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>GRL63195</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3165-a85136f6d260582923f14db0e0919d051c0888b9f9adaee923b32b383b2d98af3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kEFLw0AQhRdRsFZv_oA9Khid2W3S3aPUJgqBgq14DJtkFiNptuymSP69qfXgydMb3nzvHR5j1wj3CEI_CBCY5aBjBDxhE9SzWaQA5qdsAqDHW8yTc3YRwicASJA4YbT5IP7U7H1nWr4Yqpa4s_y96XryfE0muI5vaLsjb_q9J7703vnAm473Y3D14zfuEM5aV46SOk-VCT1fD6GnLb_J0vXtJTuzpg109atT9pYuN4vnKF9lL4vHPKokJnFkVIwysUktEoiV0EJanNUlEGjUNcRYgVKq1Fab2hCN_1KKUipZilorY-WU3R17K-9C8GSLnW-2xg8FQnGYqPg70YiLI_7VtDT8yxbZa55I1LH8BlocZp4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Diurnal Cycle of Winter Season Temperature Errors in the Operational Global Forecast System (GFS)</title><source>Wiley Online Library Free Content</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><source>Wiley-Blackwell AGU Digital Library</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Patel, Ronak N. ; Yuter, Sandra E. ; Miller, Matthew A. ; Rhodes, Spencer R. ; Bain, Lily ; Peele, Toby W.</creator><creatorcontrib>Patel, Ronak N. ; Yuter, Sandra E. ; Miller, Matthew A. ; Rhodes, Spencer R. ; Bain, Lily ; Peele, Toby W.</creatorcontrib><description>Forecasts from NOAA's Global Forecast System (GFS) and the High‐Resolution Rapid Refresh (HRRR) weather models are matched to surface observations for the winter season of November 2019 to March 2020 at 210 airports across the United States. The 2‐m temperature errors, conditioned on observed weather conditions such as cloud cover amount and wind speed, are used to determine the nature of systematic model biases. We observe a strong diurnal cycle in 2‐m temperature errors in the GFS in conditions with ≤50% and ≤25% sky cover, with a 1°C warm bias at night and a 2°C cold bias during the day. The HRRR, which uses a different set of physical parameterizations, does not have a clear diurnal cycle in errors under the same conditions. These results highlight the utility of weather‐conditional comparisons across the diurnal cycle to diagnose sources of model weaknesses and to target model improvements. Plain Language Summary We evaluate the output from weather forecast models compared to observations at 210 airports across the United States during the November 2019 to March 2020 winter season. We focus on near‐surface air temperature errors in the Global Forecast System (GFS) and High‐Resolution Rapid Refresh (HRRR) weather models for different times of day and subsets of observed weather conditions. The GFS is 1°C too warm at night and 2°C too cold during the day in conditions with ≤50% and ≤25% cloud cover. The daily high and low temperatures have smaller errors in the HRRR model, which has different algorithms than the GFS model. Model refinement and development efforts would benefit from a focus on accurate representation of the diurnal cycle of temperatures as this basic characteristic of weather can reveal strengths and weaknesses in the model physics. Key Points National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)'s global forecast system (GFS) model struggles to adequately represent the diurnal cycle of temperatures under observed conditions of ≤50% and 25% cloud cover NOAA's high‐resolution rapid refresh (HRRR) model uses a different physics suite and does not have a strong diurnal cycle of temperature errors under the same conditions Examination of errors using similar weather conditions helps to constrain the portion of model physics that can yield larger forecast errors</description><identifier>ISSN: 0094-8276</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1944-8007</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1029/2021GL095101</identifier><language>eng</language><subject>diurnal cycle ; surface observations ; temperature bias ; verification ; weather forecast model</subject><ispartof>Geophysical research letters, 2021-10, Vol.48 (20), p.n/a</ispartof><rights>2021 The Authors.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3165-a85136f6d260582923f14db0e0919d051c0888b9f9adaee923b32b383b2d98af3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3165-a85136f6d260582923f14db0e0919d051c0888b9f9adaee923b32b383b2d98af3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-5263-3411 ; 0000-0002-6854-531X ; 0000-0002-3222-053X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1029%2F2021GL095101$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029%2F2021GL095101$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,1433,11514,27924,27925,45574,45575,46409,46468,46833,46892</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Patel, Ronak N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yuter, Sandra E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miller, Matthew A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rhodes, Spencer R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bain, Lily</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peele, Toby W.</creatorcontrib><title>The Diurnal Cycle of Winter Season Temperature Errors in the Operational Global Forecast System (GFS)</title><title>Geophysical research letters</title><description>Forecasts from NOAA's Global Forecast System (GFS) and the High‐Resolution Rapid Refresh (HRRR) weather models are matched to surface observations for the winter season of November 2019 to March 2020 at 210 airports across the United States. The 2‐m temperature errors, conditioned on observed weather conditions such as cloud cover amount and wind speed, are used to determine the nature of systematic model biases. We observe a strong diurnal cycle in 2‐m temperature errors in the GFS in conditions with ≤50% and ≤25% sky cover, with a 1°C warm bias at night and a 2°C cold bias during the day. The HRRR, which uses a different set of physical parameterizations, does not have a clear diurnal cycle in errors under the same conditions. These results highlight the utility of weather‐conditional comparisons across the diurnal cycle to diagnose sources of model weaknesses and to target model improvements. Plain Language Summary We evaluate the output from weather forecast models compared to observations at 210 airports across the United States during the November 2019 to March 2020 winter season. We focus on near‐surface air temperature errors in the Global Forecast System (GFS) and High‐Resolution Rapid Refresh (HRRR) weather models for different times of day and subsets of observed weather conditions. The GFS is 1°C too warm at night and 2°C too cold during the day in conditions with ≤50% and ≤25% cloud cover. The daily high and low temperatures have smaller errors in the HRRR model, which has different algorithms than the GFS model. Model refinement and development efforts would benefit from a focus on accurate representation of the diurnal cycle of temperatures as this basic characteristic of weather can reveal strengths and weaknesses in the model physics. Key Points National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)'s global forecast system (GFS) model struggles to adequately represent the diurnal cycle of temperatures under observed conditions of ≤50% and 25% cloud cover NOAA's high‐resolution rapid refresh (HRRR) model uses a different physics suite and does not have a strong diurnal cycle of temperature errors under the same conditions Examination of errors using similar weather conditions helps to constrain the portion of model physics that can yield larger forecast errors</description><subject>diurnal cycle</subject><subject>surface observations</subject><subject>temperature bias</subject><subject>verification</subject><subject>weather forecast model</subject><issn>0094-8276</issn><issn>1944-8007</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>WIN</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kEFLw0AQhRdRsFZv_oA9Khid2W3S3aPUJgqBgq14DJtkFiNptuymSP69qfXgydMb3nzvHR5j1wj3CEI_CBCY5aBjBDxhE9SzWaQA5qdsAqDHW8yTc3YRwicASJA4YbT5IP7U7H1nWr4Yqpa4s_y96XryfE0muI5vaLsjb_q9J7703vnAm473Y3D14zfuEM5aV46SOk-VCT1fD6GnLb_J0vXtJTuzpg109atT9pYuN4vnKF9lL4vHPKokJnFkVIwysUktEoiV0EJanNUlEGjUNcRYgVKq1Fab2hCN_1KKUipZilorY-WU3R17K-9C8GSLnW-2xg8FQnGYqPg70YiLI_7VtDT8yxbZa55I1LH8BlocZp4</recordid><startdate>20211028</startdate><enddate>20211028</enddate><creator>Patel, Ronak N.</creator><creator>Yuter, Sandra E.</creator><creator>Miller, Matthew A.</creator><creator>Rhodes, Spencer R.</creator><creator>Bain, Lily</creator><creator>Peele, Toby W.</creator><scope>24P</scope><scope>WIN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5263-3411</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6854-531X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3222-053X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20211028</creationdate><title>The Diurnal Cycle of Winter Season Temperature Errors in the Operational Global Forecast System (GFS)</title><author>Patel, Ronak N. ; Yuter, Sandra E. ; Miller, Matthew A. ; Rhodes, Spencer R. ; Bain, Lily ; Peele, Toby W.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3165-a85136f6d260582923f14db0e0919d051c0888b9f9adaee923b32b383b2d98af3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>diurnal cycle</topic><topic>surface observations</topic><topic>temperature bias</topic><topic>verification</topic><topic>weather forecast model</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Patel, Ronak N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yuter, Sandra E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miller, Matthew A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rhodes, Spencer R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bain, Lily</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peele, Toby W.</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library Open Access</collection><collection>Wiley Online Library Free Content</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Geophysical research letters</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Patel, Ronak N.</au><au>Yuter, Sandra E.</au><au>Miller, Matthew A.</au><au>Rhodes, Spencer R.</au><au>Bain, Lily</au><au>Peele, Toby W.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Diurnal Cycle of Winter Season Temperature Errors in the Operational Global Forecast System (GFS)</atitle><jtitle>Geophysical research letters</jtitle><date>2021-10-28</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>48</volume><issue>20</issue><epage>n/a</epage><issn>0094-8276</issn><eissn>1944-8007</eissn><abstract>Forecasts from NOAA's Global Forecast System (GFS) and the High‐Resolution Rapid Refresh (HRRR) weather models are matched to surface observations for the winter season of November 2019 to March 2020 at 210 airports across the United States. The 2‐m temperature errors, conditioned on observed weather conditions such as cloud cover amount and wind speed, are used to determine the nature of systematic model biases. We observe a strong diurnal cycle in 2‐m temperature errors in the GFS in conditions with ≤50% and ≤25% sky cover, with a 1°C warm bias at night and a 2°C cold bias during the day. The HRRR, which uses a different set of physical parameterizations, does not have a clear diurnal cycle in errors under the same conditions. These results highlight the utility of weather‐conditional comparisons across the diurnal cycle to diagnose sources of model weaknesses and to target model improvements. Plain Language Summary We evaluate the output from weather forecast models compared to observations at 210 airports across the United States during the November 2019 to March 2020 winter season. We focus on near‐surface air temperature errors in the Global Forecast System (GFS) and High‐Resolution Rapid Refresh (HRRR) weather models for different times of day and subsets of observed weather conditions. The GFS is 1°C too warm at night and 2°C too cold during the day in conditions with ≤50% and ≤25% cloud cover. The daily high and low temperatures have smaller errors in the HRRR model, which has different algorithms than the GFS model. Model refinement and development efforts would benefit from a focus on accurate representation of the diurnal cycle of temperatures as this basic characteristic of weather can reveal strengths and weaknesses in the model physics. Key Points National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)'s global forecast system (GFS) model struggles to adequately represent the diurnal cycle of temperatures under observed conditions of ≤50% and 25% cloud cover NOAA's high‐resolution rapid refresh (HRRR) model uses a different physics suite and does not have a strong diurnal cycle of temperature errors under the same conditions Examination of errors using similar weather conditions helps to constrain the portion of model physics that can yield larger forecast errors</abstract><doi>10.1029/2021GL095101</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5263-3411</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6854-531X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3222-053X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0094-8276
ispartof Geophysical research letters, 2021-10, Vol.48 (20), p.n/a
issn 0094-8276
1944-8007
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1029_2021GL095101
source Wiley Online Library Free Content; Access via Wiley Online Library; Wiley-Blackwell AGU Digital Library; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals
subjects diurnal cycle
surface observations
temperature bias
verification
weather forecast model
title The Diurnal Cycle of Winter Season Temperature Errors in the Operational Global Forecast System (GFS)
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-22T04%3A16%3A48IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-wiley_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Diurnal%20Cycle%20of%20Winter%20Season%20Temperature%20Errors%20in%20the%20Operational%20Global%20Forecast%20System%20(GFS)&rft.jtitle=Geophysical%20research%20letters&rft.au=Patel,%20Ronak%20N.&rft.date=2021-10-28&rft.volume=48&rft.issue=20&rft.epage=n/a&rft.issn=0094-8276&rft.eissn=1944-8007&rft_id=info:doi/10.1029/2021GL095101&rft_dat=%3Cwiley_cross%3EGRL63195%3C/wiley_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true