MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980378914 · doi:10.1175/mwr-d-13-00180.1

Postprocessing of Ensemble Weather Forecasts Using a Stochastic Weather Generator

2013· article· en· W1980378914 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jie Chen, François Brissette, Zhi Li

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Weather Review · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNorth American Mesoscale ModelQuantitative precipitation forecastEnsemble forecastingPrecipitationMeteorologyGlobal Forecast SystemCalibrationNumerical weather predictionConsensus forecastEnvironmental scienceWeather forecastingModel output statisticsProbabilistic forecastingComputer scienceAutocorrelationProbabilistic logicStatisticsMathematicsArtificial intelligenceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study proposes a new statistical method for postprocessing ensemble weather forecasts using a stochastic weather generator. Key parameters of the weather generator were linked to the ensemble forecast means for both precipitation and temperature, allowing the generation of an infinite number of daily times series that are fully coherent with the ensemble weather forecast. This method was verified through postprocessing reforecast datasets derived from the Global Forecast System (GFS) for forecast leads ranging between 1 and 7 days over two Canadian watersheds in the Province of Quebec. The calibration of the ensemble weather forecasts was based on a cross-validation approach that leaves one year out for validation and uses the remaining years for training the model. The proposed method was compared with a simple bias correction method for ensemble precipitation and temperature forecasts using a set of deterministic and probabilistic metrics. The results show underdispersion and biases for the raw GFS ensemble weather forecasts, which indicated that they were poorly calibrated. The proposed method significantly increased the predictive power of ensemble weather forecasts for forecast leads ranging between 1 and 7 days, and was consistently better than the bias correction method. The ability to generate discrete, autocorrelated daily time series leads to ensemble weather forecasts’ straightforward use in forecasting models commonly used in the fields of hydrology or agriculture. This study further indicates that the calibration of ensemble forecasts for a period up to one week is reasonable for precipitation, and for temperature it could be reasonable for another week.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.210 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Weather ReviewSame topicMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsFrench-language works237,207