YANG Ruiwen,QU Rongqiang,TAN Zhenghua,et al.Forecast Error Analysis of Typhoon going North for Different Models in 2020[J].Journal of Chengdu University of Information Technology,2024,39(02):208-215.[doi:10.16836/j.cnki.jcuit.2024.02.012]
2020年北上台风不同模式的预报误差分析
- Title:
- Forecast Error Analysis of Typhoon going North for Different Models in 2020
- 文章编号:
- 2096-1618(2024)02-0208-08
- 关键词:
- 台风路径; 降水预报; 预报检验; 空间检验(MODE)
- Keywords:
- typhoon track; precipitation forecast; forecast verification; the method of object-based diagnosis evaluation verification(MODE)
- 分类号:
- P457.6
- 文献标志码:
- A
- 摘要:
- 2020年台风“巴威”、“美莎克”和“海神”直接北上引发了辽宁地区大范围的强降水天气过程。针对业务数值预报模式在路径、强度和降水等方面预报存在一定偏差,利用多家数值模式台风预报资料,采用评分检验和空间检验方法对北上台风的模式预报结果进行检验评估,为以后的台风气象预报工作提供参考。结果表明:各模式对台风路径的可预报时效为72 h,随着台风逐渐北上,台风的路径预报误差偏大,台风的强度预报较稳定。在降水的MODE检验结果中,ECMWF全球模式的相似度更高,CMA_MESO_3KM区域模式对降水量级预报偏大,空报较多,但两者对台风降水都有着较好的可参考性,同时台风降水预报效果与台风路径和强度预报密切相关。
- Abstract:
- BAVI, MAYSAK and HAISHEN, which moved directly northward, triggered heavy precipitation in the Liaoning region in 2020. However, the numerical forecast models showed some deviation in predicting the path, intensity, and precipitation. Based on the typhoon forecasting data from multiple numerical models, we evaluated the forecasting results of the three typhoons using score tests and object-based diagnosis evaluation(MODE). to evaluate the forecasting results of three typhoons. In addition, providing a reference for future typhoon weather forecasting work. The result indicated that the model forecasting time for typhoon track is 72 hours. With the typhoon moving northward, the error of the typhoon’s path forecast is larger, while the forecast of its intensity is relatively stable. The ECMWF model has a higher target similarity score, while the CMA_MESO_3KM model has a larger forecast of precipitation amount and a high false alarm rate,based on the MODE results. Both of them have a good reference for typhoon precipitation, and typhoon precipitation prediction is closely related to typhoon track and intensity prediction.
参考文献/References:
[1] 孙力,隋波,王晓明,等.我国东北地区夏季暴雨的气候学特征[J].气候与环境研究,2010,15(6):778-786.
[2] 杨磊,孙丽,王东东,等.2017年“海棠”台风影响辽宁不同区域极端暴雨成因分析[J].气象与环境学报,2020,36(1):1-10.
[3] 崔曜鹏,杨磊,孙丽,等.辽宁东南半岛两次北上台风暴雨特征及成因对比分析[J].气象与环境学报,2022,38(2):1-11.
[4] 危国飞,刘会军,潘宁,等.台风路径数值预报实时订正技术及其集成应用[J].大气科学,2021,45(1):195-204.
[5] 金荣花,高拴柱,顾华,等.近31年登陆北上台风特征及其成因分析[J].气象,2006(7):33-39.
[6] 倪钟萍,吴广立,张玲.2005-2010年台风突变路径的预报误差及其环流背景[J].气象,39(6):719-727.
[7] 端义宏,余晖,伍荣升.热带气象强度变化研究进展[J].气象学报,2005,63(5):636-645.
[8] Wu L,Liang J,Wu Chun Chieh.Monsoonal influence on typhoon Morakot(2009).PartI:Observation analysis[J].J Atmos Sci,2011,68:2208-2221.
[9] 钟有亮,陈静,王静,等.GRAPES区域集合预报系统对登陆台风预报的检验评估[J].热带气象学报,2017,33(6):953-964.
[10] 端义宏.登陆台风精细结构的观测、预报与影响评估[J].地球科学进展,2015,30(8):847-854.
[11] 王新敏,栗晗.多数值模式对台风暴雨过程预报的空间检验评估[J].气象,2020,46(6):753-764.
[12] 公颖.SAL定量降水预报检验方法的解释与应用[J].暴雨灾害,2010,29(2):153-159.
[13] 苏翔,康志明.基于对象诊断的超强台风“利奇马”(1909)模式强降水预报检验[J].气象科学,2020,40(1):30-40.
[14] Ying M,Zhang W,Yu H,et al.An overview of the China Meteorological Administration tropical cyclone database[J].J.Atmos.Oceanic Technol.2014,31,287-301.
[15] Lu X,Yu Q,Ying M,et al.Western North Pacific tropical cyclone database created by the China Meteorological Administration[J].Adv.Atmos.Sci.,2021,38(4),690-699.
[16] 孙帅,师春香,潘旸,等.中国区域三源融合降水产品的改进效果评估[J].水文,2020,40(6):10-15+23.
[17] 潘留杰,张宏芳,薛春芳,等.数值模式评估系统MET及其初步应用[J].气象科技进展,2016,6(4):37-43.
[18] 马雷鸣,李佳,黄伟,等.2007年国内台风模式路径预报效果评估[J].气象,2008(10):74-80.
[19] 李佳,陈葆德,徐同.目标检验方法在高分辨率数值天气预报检验中的应用[J].沙漠与绿洲气象,2016,10(5):1-9.
[20] 蔡义勇,危国飞,党皓飞,等.基于降水目标的主雨带识别及预报误差空间检验[J].气象与环境学报,2020,36(1):36-42.
[21] 王东东,孙丽,杨磊,等.台风“巴威”不同类型降水多模式预报与空间检验对比评估[J].气象与环境学报,2022,38(4):37-46.
[22] 王新敏,栗晗.多数值模式对台风暴雨过程预报的空间检验评估[J].气象,2020,46(6):753-764.
备注/Memo
收稿日期:2023-02-20
基金项目:中国气象局沈阳大气环境研究所联合开放基金课题资助项目(2021SYIAEKFMS06)