MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3180341658 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu2020-599

Predictability of Precipitation in Complex Terrain using the WRF Model with Varying Physics Parameterizations

2020· article· en· W3180341658 on OpenAlexaffabout
Julia Jeworrek, Gregory West, Roland B. Stull

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsBC Hydro (Canada)University of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeather Research and Forecasting ModelPrecipitationEnvironmental scienceClimatologyQuantitative precipitation estimationTerrainQuantitative precipitation forecastMeteorologyNumerical weather predictionAtmospheric sciencesGeographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada’s west coast topography plays a crucial role for the local precipitation patterns, which are often shaped by orographic lifting on one side of the mountains, and rain shadows on the other side. The hydroelectric infrastructure in southwest British Columbia (BC) relies heavily on the abundant rainfall of the wet season, but long lasting and heavy precipitation can cause local flooding and make reliable precipitation forecasts crucial for resource management, risk assessment, and disaster mitigation. This research evaluates hourly precipitation forecasts from the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model over the complex terrain of southwest BC. The model data includes a full year of daily runs across three nested domains (27-9-3 km). A selection of different parameterizations is systematically varied, including microphysics, cumulus, turbulence, and land-surface parameterizations. The resulting over 100 model configurations are evaluated with observations from ground-based quality-controlled precipitation gauges. The individual model skill of the precipitation forecasts is assessed with respect to different accumulation windows, forecast horizons, grid resolutions, and precipitation intensities. Furthermore, the ensemble mean and spread provide insight to the general error growth for precipitation forecasts in WRF. Cumulus and microphysics parameterizations together determine the total precipitation in numerical weather prediction models and this study confirms the expectation that the combination of those physics parameterizations is most decisive for the precipitation forecasts. However, the boundary-layer and land-surface parameterizations have a secondary effect on precipitation skill. The verification shows that the WSM5 microphysics parameterization yields surprisingly competitive verification scores when compared to more sophisticated and computationally expensive parameterizations. Although, the scale-aware Grell-Freitas cumulus parameterization performs better for summer-time convective precipitation, the conventional Kain-Fritsch parameterization performs better for winter-time frontal precipitation, which contributes to the majority of the annual rainfall in southwest BC. Throughout a 3-day forecast horizon mean absolute errors are observed to grow by ~5% per forecast day. Furthermore, this study indicates that coarser resolutions suffer from larger total biases and larger random error components, however, they have slightly higher correlation coefficients. The mid-size 9-km domain yields the highest relative hit rate for significant and extreme precipitation. Verification metrics improve exponentially with longer accumulation windows: On one side, hourly precipitation values are highly prone to double-penalty issues (where a timing error can, for example, result in an over-forecast error in one hour and an under-forecast in a subsequent hour); on the other side, extended accumulation windows can compensate for timing errors, but lose information about short-term rain intensities.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.302
Threshold uncertainty score0.601

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.138 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsFrench-language works237,207