Precipitation and Temperature Forecast Performance at the Weather Prediction Center. Novak, D. R., Bailey, C., Brill, K. F., Burke, P., Hogsett, W. A., Rausch, R., & Schichtel, M. Weather and Forecasting, 29(3):489–504, June, 2014. Publisher: American Meteorological Society Section: Weather and Forecasting![Precipitation and Temperature Forecast Performance at the Weather Prediction Center [link]](https://bibbase.org/img/filetypes/link.svg "link")
Paper doi abstract bibtex Abstract The role of the human forecaster in improving upon the accuracy of numerical weather prediction is explored using multiyear verification of human-generated short-range precipitation forecasts and medium-range maximum temperature forecasts from the Weather Prediction Center (WPC). Results show that human-generated forecasts improve over raw deterministic model guidance. Over the past two decades, WPC human forecasters achieved a 20%–40% improvement over the North American Mesoscale (NAM) model and the Global Forecast System (GFS) for the 1 in. (25.4 mm) (24 h)−1 threshold for day 1 precipitation forecasts, with a smaller, but statistically significant, 5%–15% improvement over the deterministic ECMWF model. Medium-range maximum temperature forecasts also exhibit statistically significant improvement over GFS model output statistics (MOS), and the improvement has been increasing over the past 5 yr. The quality added by humans for forecasts of high-impact events varies by element and forecast projection, with generally large improvements when the forecaster makes changes ≥8°F (4.4°C) to MOS temperatures. Human improvement over guidance for extreme rainfall events [3 in. (76.2 mm) (24 h)−1] is largest in the short-range forecast. However, human-generated forecasts failed to outperform the most skillful downscaled, bias-corrected ensemble guidance for precipitation and maximum temperature available near the same time as the human-modified forecasts. Thus, as additional downscaled and bias-corrected sensible weather element guidance becomes operationally available, and with the support of near-real-time verification, forecaster training, and tools to guide forecaster interventions, a key test is whether forecasters can learn to make statistically significant improvements over the most skillful of this guidance. Such a test can inform to what degree, and just how quickly, the role of the forecaster changes.
@article{novak_precipitation_2014,
title = {Precipitation and {Temperature} {Forecast} {Performance} at the {Weather} {Prediction} {Center}},
volume = {29},
issn = {1520-0434, 0882-8156},
url = {https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/wefo/29/3/waf-d-13-00066_1.xml},
doi = {10.1175/WAF-D-13-00066.1},
abstract = {Abstract The role of the human forecaster in improving upon the accuracy of numerical weather prediction is explored using multiyear verification of human-generated short-range precipitation forecasts and medium-range maximum temperature forecasts from the Weather Prediction Center (WPC). Results show that human-generated forecasts improve over raw deterministic model guidance. Over the past two decades, WPC human forecasters achieved a 20\%–40\% improvement over the North American Mesoscale (NAM) model and the Global Forecast System (GFS) for the 1 in. (25.4 mm) (24 h)−1 threshold for day 1 precipitation forecasts, with a smaller, but statistically significant, 5\%–15\% improvement over the deterministic ECMWF model. Medium-range maximum temperature forecasts also exhibit statistically significant improvement over GFS model output statistics (MOS), and the improvement has been increasing over the past 5 yr. The quality added by humans for forecasts of high-impact events varies by element and forecast projection, with generally large improvements when the forecaster makes changes ≥8°F (4.4°C) to MOS temperatures. Human improvement over guidance for extreme rainfall events [3 in. (76.2 mm) (24 h)−1] is largest in the short-range forecast. However, human-generated forecasts failed to outperform the most skillful downscaled, bias-corrected ensemble guidance for precipitation and maximum temperature available near the same time as the human-modified forecasts. Thus, as additional downscaled and bias-corrected sensible weather element guidance becomes operationally available, and with the support of near-real-time verification, forecaster training, and tools to guide forecaster interventions, a key test is whether forecasters can learn to make statistically significant improvements over the most skillful of this guidance. Such a test can inform to what degree, and just how quickly, the role of the forecaster changes.},
language = {EN},
number = {3},
urldate = {2021-11-30},
journal = {Weather and Forecasting},
author = {Novak, David R. and Bailey, Christopher and Brill, Keith F. and Burke, Patrick and Hogsett, Wallace A. and Rausch, Robert and Schichtel, Michael},
month = jun,
year = {2014},
note = {Publisher: American Meteorological Society
Section: Weather and Forecasting},
pages = {489--504},
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"ZZBqDJGwdZJaeDNZ7","bibbaseid":"novak-bailey-brill-burke-hogsett-rausch-schichtel-precipitationandtemperatureforecastperformanceattheweatherpredictioncenter-2014","author_short":["Novak, D. R.","Bailey, C.","Brill, K. F.","Burke, P.","Hogsett, W. A.","Rausch, R.","Schichtel, M."],"bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","title":"Precipitation and Temperature Forecast Performance at the Weather Prediction Center","volume":"29","issn":"1520-0434, 0882-8156","url":"https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/wefo/29/3/waf-d-13-00066_1.xml","doi":"10.1175/WAF-D-13-00066.1","abstract":"Abstract The role of the human forecaster in improving upon the accuracy of numerical weather prediction is explored using multiyear verification of human-generated short-range precipitation forecasts and medium-range maximum temperature forecasts from the Weather Prediction Center (WPC). Results show that human-generated forecasts improve over raw deterministic model guidance. Over the past two decades, WPC human forecasters achieved a 20%–40% improvement over the North American Mesoscale (NAM) model and the Global Forecast System (GFS) for the 1 in. (25.4 mm) (24 h)−1 threshold for day 1 precipitation forecasts, with a smaller, but statistically significant, 5%–15% improvement over the deterministic ECMWF model. Medium-range maximum temperature forecasts also exhibit statistically significant improvement over GFS model output statistics (MOS), and the improvement has been increasing over the past 5 yr. The quality added by humans for forecasts of high-impact events varies by element and forecast projection, with generally large improvements when the forecaster makes changes ≥8°F (4.4°C) to MOS temperatures. Human improvement over guidance for extreme rainfall events [3 in. (76.2 mm) (24 h)−1] is largest in the short-range forecast. However, human-generated forecasts failed to outperform the most skillful downscaled, bias-corrected ensemble guidance for precipitation and maximum temperature available near the same time as the human-modified forecasts. Thus, as additional downscaled and bias-corrected sensible weather element guidance becomes operationally available, and with the support of near-real-time verification, forecaster training, and tools to guide forecaster interventions, a key test is whether forecasters can learn to make statistically significant improvements over the most skillful of this guidance. Such a test can inform to what degree, and just how quickly, the role of the forecaster changes.","language":"EN","number":"3","urldate":"2021-11-30","journal":"Weather and Forecasting","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Novak"],"firstnames":["David","R."],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Bailey"],"firstnames":["Christopher"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Brill"],"firstnames":["Keith","F."],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Burke"],"firstnames":["Patrick"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Hogsett"],"firstnames":["Wallace","A."],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Rausch"],"firstnames":["Robert"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Schichtel"],"firstnames":["Michael"],"suffixes":[]}],"month":"June","year":"2014","note":"Publisher: American Meteorological Society Section: Weather and Forecasting","pages":"489–504","bibtex":"@article{novak_precipitation_2014,\n\ttitle = {Precipitation and {Temperature} {Forecast} {Performance} at the {Weather} {Prediction} {Center}},\n\tvolume = {29},\n\tissn = {1520-0434, 0882-8156},\n\turl = {https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/wefo/29/3/waf-d-13-00066_1.xml},\n\tdoi = {10.1175/WAF-D-13-00066.1},\n\tabstract = {Abstract The role of the human forecaster in improving upon the accuracy of numerical weather prediction is explored using multiyear verification of human-generated short-range precipitation forecasts and medium-range maximum temperature forecasts from the Weather Prediction Center (WPC). Results show that human-generated forecasts improve over raw deterministic model guidance. Over the past two decades, WPC human forecasters achieved a 20\\%–40\\% improvement over the North American Mesoscale (NAM) model and the Global Forecast System (GFS) for the 1 in. (25.4 mm) (24 h)−1 threshold for day 1 precipitation forecasts, with a smaller, but statistically significant, 5\\%–15\\% improvement over the deterministic ECMWF model. Medium-range maximum temperature forecasts also exhibit statistically significant improvement over GFS model output statistics (MOS), and the improvement has been increasing over the past 5 yr. The quality added by humans for forecasts of high-impact events varies by element and forecast projection, with generally large improvements when the forecaster makes changes ≥8°F (4.4°C) to MOS temperatures. Human improvement over guidance for extreme rainfall events [3 in. (76.2 mm) (24 h)−1] is largest in the short-range forecast. However, human-generated forecasts failed to outperform the most skillful downscaled, bias-corrected ensemble guidance for precipitation and maximum temperature available near the same time as the human-modified forecasts. Thus, as additional downscaled and bias-corrected sensible weather element guidance becomes operationally available, and with the support of near-real-time verification, forecaster training, and tools to guide forecaster interventions, a key test is whether forecasters can learn to make statistically significant improvements over the most skillful of this guidance. Such a test can inform to what degree, and just how quickly, the role of the forecaster changes.},\n\tlanguage = {EN},\n\tnumber = {3},\n\turldate = {2021-11-30},\n\tjournal = {Weather and Forecasting},\n\tauthor = {Novak, David R. and Bailey, Christopher and Brill, Keith F. and Burke, Patrick and Hogsett, Wallace A. and Rausch, Robert and Schichtel, Michael},\n\tmonth = jun,\n\tyear = {2014},\n\tnote = {Publisher: American Meteorological Society\nSection: Weather and Forecasting},\n\tpages = {489--504},\n}\n\n","author_short":["Novak, D. R.","Bailey, C.","Brill, K. F.","Burke, P.","Hogsett, W. A.","Rausch, R.","Schichtel, M."],"key":"novak_precipitation_2014","id":"novak_precipitation_2014","bibbaseid":"novak-bailey-brill-burke-hogsett-rausch-schichtel-precipitationandtemperatureforecastperformanceattheweatherpredictioncenter-2014","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/wefo/29/3/waf-d-13-00066_1.xml"},"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}}},"bibtype":"article","biburl":"https://bibbase.org/zotero/manabsaharia","dataSources":["XpugPdSrCaPJgR6v7"],"keywords":[],"search_terms":["precipitation","temperature","forecast","performance","weather","prediction","center","novak","bailey","brill","burke","hogsett","rausch","schichtel"],"title":"Precipitation and Temperature Forecast Performance at the Weather Prediction Center","year":2014}