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]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