2011
DOI: 10.1504/ijep.2011.038442
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

COST 732 in practice: the MUST model evaluation exercise

Abstract: The aim of this paper is to describe the use of a general methodologytailored to the evaluation of micro-scale meteorological models appliedto flow and dispersion simulations in urban areas. This methodology,developed within COST 732, has been tested through a large modellingexercise involving many groups across Europe. The major test caseused is the Mock Urban Setting Test (MUST) experiment representingan idealised urban area. It is emphasised that a full model evaluationis problem-dependent and requires seve… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
34
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 74 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
1
34
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The second, fourth and sixth locations along the y-axis correspond to the locations of the spanwise lines c03, c05 and c07 A large number of statistical performance measures have been proposed and used to evaluate dispersion models, see for example Chang and Hanna (2004). In the present case, the comparison will be performed using the metrics factor of two (Fa2), mean relative bias (MRB), fractional bias (FB), mean relative square error (MRSE), and normalized mean square error (NMSE), in line with the recommendations from the SMEDIS project (Carissimo et al 2001) and the more recent COST 732 action (Schatzmann et al 2010;Di Sabatino et al 2011).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The second, fourth and sixth locations along the y-axis correspond to the locations of the spanwise lines c03, c05 and c07 A large number of statistical performance measures have been proposed and used to evaluate dispersion models, see for example Chang and Hanna (2004). In the present case, the comparison will be performed using the metrics factor of two (Fa2), mean relative bias (MRB), fractional bias (FB), mean relative square error (MRSE), and normalized mean square error (NMSE), in line with the recommendations from the SMEDIS project (Carissimo et al 2001) and the more recent COST 732 action (Schatzmann et al 2010;Di Sabatino et al 2011).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The requirements set out in three recent guidelines [32][33][34] were followed in the present work. The governing Eqs.…”
Section: Environ Fluid Mechmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The results of the exercise were compiled (e.g. Olesen et al, 2008;Schatzmann et al, 2009;Di Sabatino et al, 2011). They concluded that flow and concentration model results compare relatively well with the measurements and the prediction for the streamwise velocity component is better than for the vertical velocity component.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%