30 likes | 137 Views
Overall Statistics RMSE WRF-UA: 159 W m -2 WRF-UCSD: 171 W m -2 STDERR ‘Bias-corrected RMSE’ WRF-UA: 165 W m -2 WRF-UCSD: 164 W m -2 Ratios compared to NAM WRF-UA more accurate for 4/6 days Forecast horizon WRF-UCSD is more accurate for the first 6-7 hours of simulation time.
E N D
Overall Statistics RMSE • WRF-UA: 159 W m-2 • WRF-UCSD: 171 W m-2 • STDERR • ‘Bias-corrected RMSE’ • WRF-UA: 165 W m-2 • WRF-UCSD: 164 W m-2 • Ratios compared to NAM • WRF-UA more accurate for 4/6 days • Forecast horizon • WRF-UCSD is more accurate for the first 6-7 hours of simulation time
WRF-UA WRF-UCSD 1500 UTC 8/10/2011 • WRF-UCSD performed much worse than WRF-UA • Not enough cloud cover (afternoon) • Scale of clouds • WRF-UA cloud scales are much smaller, despite WRF-UA having slightly coarser resolution (1.8 km vs. 1.3 km) 1900 UTC 2200 UTC
WRF-UA WRF-UCSD • 8/12/2011 • Largest improvement over WRF-UA • Cloud field burnoff • Timing captured by WRF-UCSD • Too many afternoon clouds in WRF-UA • WRF-UA has two distinct types of clouds from the model 1700 UTC Clouds generated by PBL scheme? Shallow convection? 2000 UTC 2200 UTC