2023
DOI: 10.1002/qj.4521
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

D‐vine‐copula‐based postprocessing of wind speed ensemble forecasts

Abstract: Current practice in predicting future weather is the use of numerical weather prediction (NWP) models to produce ensemble forecasts. Despite of enormous improvements over the last few decades, they still tend to exhibit bias and dispersion errors and, consequently, lack calibration. Therefore, these forecasts may be improved by statistical postprocessing. In this work, we propose a D‐vine‐copula‐based postprocessing for 10 m surface wind speed ensemble forecasts. This approach makes use of quantile regression … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 72 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This loss is a well‐known problem often discussed in the literature about post‐processing of ensemble forecasts (Bellier et al ., 2018; Jobst et al ., 2023; Möller et al ., 2013; Wu et al ., 2018). To overcome this drawback, several approaches have been developed that reintroduce spatial information to post‐processed marginal distributions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This loss is a well‐known problem often discussed in the literature about post‐processing of ensemble forecasts (Bellier et al ., 2018; Jobst et al ., 2023; Möller et al ., 2013; Wu et al ., 2018). To overcome this drawback, several approaches have been developed that reintroduce spatial information to post‐processed marginal distributions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently, the D-vine copula based quantile regression (DVQR), which was developed by Kraus and Czado (2017) and further extended by Tepegjozova et al (2022) and Sahin and Czado (2022), was used by Möller et al (2018) and Demaeyer et al (2023) for the postprocessing of 2 m surface temperature forecasts. Jobst et al (2023c) used the same method for the postprocessing of 10 m surface wind speed forecasts. In all three analyses, DVQR showed comparable or sometimes even better results with respect to its competing methods.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the ensemble postprocessing context the sliding window size depends on various factors, such as considered variables, seasons, locations, etc., which should be ideally taken into account. Therefore, Jobst et al (2023c) compared different types of training periods in the DVQR model estimation, and detected that a reduction in the computational complexity usually comes along with a worse predictive performance. In this work, we exactly tackle this problem and allow for arbitrary covariate effects in the DVQR model, such as temporal, spatial or spatio-temporal ones.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%