1 / 10

Validation Working Group

Validation Working Group. Chairs: Paul Kucera & Chris Kidd. 1.

awellman
Download Presentation

Validation Working Group

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Validation Working Group Chairs: Paul Kucera & Chris Kidd

  2. 1 Recommend an inter-comparison project (similar to PIP, AIP) for the evaluation of HRPP. Products should aim for a standard of three hourly, 0.25 degree resolution with global coverage, with validation done at the regional scale. Details of the inter-comparison (locations, temporal scale, etc.) will be charged to an inter-comparison working group in association with the GPM working group to maximize the impact of such a comparison. The inter-comparison should be completed in the next 24 to 36 months.

  3. 2 Recommend that the outputs of the current and future validation efforts are better utilized: a working group should be formed under IPWG as a PEHRPP activity, and should report by the next IPWG meeting (October 2008). The co-chairs should be a product developer and validation site developer.

  4. 3 Recommend the use of existing HRPP in hydrological impact studies, such as the EUMETSAT H-SAF and HydroMet testbeds in the US, to assess the usefulness of the HRPP products in hydrological models.

  5. 4 Recommend that the meteorological modeling community actively provides model outputs (e.g. precipitation fields, 700mb winds) to the satellite precipitation development and validation communities.

  6. 5 Recommend that investigators evaluate the usefulness of other validation tools. In particular, to investigate the use of spatial validation techniques that are currently available such as neighborhood (e.g. fuzzy validation) or feature based tools (e.g. CRA).

  7. 6 Recommend that guidelines are established for the standardization of product formats and filename conventions (grid format, units, etc) with the goal of making the data more easily usable among the validation community.

  8. 7 Recommend the discussion at a higher level concerning the distribution of HRPP through networks such as GEONETCast, to maximize the utility of such products.

  9. 8 Recommend that we include and/or encourage the development of high-latitude sites such as the BALTEX, LOFZY, high latitude maritime radar sites, and/or the Canadian sites.

  10. 9 Recommend that countries or weather institutions with high quality ground validation dataset actively participate in IPWG sponsored validation activities.

More Related