摘要
采用 WMO推荐的标准化检验方法对两套初值方案进行检验。一套为使用T1 0 6 L1 9全球中期模式预报场作为初猜场的 cressman逐步订正客观分析方案(T1 0 6 ) ;一套为直接插值客观分析方案 (OBS)。通过对比分析发现 :1反映大尺度环流场的要素 ,例如 ,30 0 h Pa风场、5 0 0 h Pa高度 ,T1 0 6初值方案略好于 OBS。2空间尺度较小的要素 ,例如 ,85 0 h Pa温度、湿度等 ,OBS略优于 T1 0 6 ;在比湿预报场中 ,低层预报优于高层 ,但 85 0 h Pa比湿预报出现正的系统误差 ,随着预报时效的延长 ,正系统误差加大。 3在风场的预报中 ,低层预报总体不如高层好 ,U风分量的预报有负的系统性误差 ,V风分量有正的系统性误差。同时对两种初值预报的降水进行 TS评分。评分结果表明 ,T1 0 6的总体评分高于 OBS,但 T1 0 6初值方案的空报率高于OBS,而 OBS初值方案的漏报率高于 T1 0
The initial fields and output of Mesoscale Numerical Prediction System in Northeast China were verified by means of WMO's standard verification method because there were some failures in the operational prediction There are two kinds of initial fields and output, one is that the initial fields were created by output of medium range forecast model (T106L19) used as initial first guess fields and were corrected by sounding data set, called T106 The other is of the objectively analyzing fields of sounding data set, called OBS The results of verification as the follows: (1) T106 is better than OBS in the elements that represents synoptic scale, such as 300hPa's wind and 500hPa's height (2) OBS is better in the elements that represents mesoscale, such as 850hPa's temperature and humidity The output at the low level are more precious than that at the high level (3) The predicted winds at the high level are better, but there are some prediction errors in U and V component field At one time, TS skill scores of precipitation were calculated for two kinds of output These results indicate that TS score of T106 is higher than OBS's in general, but there are more rain of prediction with T106 initial fields with OBS's initial fields than observation rains
出处
《气象》
CSCD
北大核心
2001年第7期8-12,共5页
Meteorological Monthly
