Evaluation of NCEP‐2 and CFSR reanalysis seasonal temperature data in China using detrended fluctuation analysis

Abstract

ABSTRACT:In the present study, the performance of the National Centers for Environmental Prediction/Department of Energy (NCEP/DOE) Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project (AMIP-II) reanalysis (NCEP-2) and NCEP Climate Forecast System Reanalysis (CFSR) seasonal temperature data for China was quantitatively evaluated by using detrended fluctuation analysis. The results indicate that the quality of the NCEP-2 temperature data is the highest in autumn, while the quality of CFSR data set is the highest in summer. Both the quality of NCEP-2 and that of CFSR temperature data is the lowest in winter. The quality is very low in eastern Tibetan Plateau and most of Xinjiang at a significance level of 0.05 for the NCEP-2 and CFSR reanalysis temperature data including three elements: the daily average temperature (T mean ), the daily maximum temperature (T max ) and the daily minimum temperature (T min ). The performance of the NCEP-2 T mean data is poorer than those of the NCEP-2 T max and T min data for all four seasons, while the performance of CFSR T mean is better than that of CFSR T max and T min for all four seasons. In addition, the NCEP-2 T max , T min and CFSR T mean , T max data perform well in most of central and eastern China for all four seasons. The quality of the CFSR T mean is better than that of the NCEP-2 T mean for all four seasons. However, the NCEP-2 T max and T min data have higher credibility than that of the CFSR T max and T min data for all four seasons. Therefore, it is important to consider the reliability of the NCEP-2 and CFSR daily temperature reanalysis data in different districts and seasons when drawing conclusions from the different reanalysis data.KEY WORDS detrended fluctuation analysis; scaling exponent; long-range correlation; quality of reanalysis data

A Comparison of Global Surface Air Temperature Over the Oceans Between CMIP5 Models and NCEP Reanalysis

“…The LRC method has been widely used to verify the performance of climate models for the climate simulation (Zhao et al, 2017;He and Zhao, 2018). However, most of previous studies focus on the land surface air temperature, little research on sea surface temperature has been conducted.…”

Whether the CMIP5 Models Can Reproduce the Long-Range Correlation of Daily Precipitation?

“…However, these evaluation methods cannot reproduce the inner dynamical characteristics of climate system. Therefore, a nonlinear method, long-range correlation (LRC) is needed to understand the intrinsic dynamical characteristics of climate system (Koscielny- Bunde et al, 1998;Malamud and Turcotte 1999;Fu et al, 2016;He et al, 2016;Zhao et al, 2017).…”

“…The detrended fluctuation analysis (DFA) is a useful tool to estimate the LRC for assessing models' simulate performance (Kantelhardt et al, 2001;Kantelhardt et al, 2002;Blender and Fraedrich, 2003;Kumar et al, 2013;Zhao and He, 2014;He and Zhao, 2017). Govindan et al (2002) found that seven models failed to reproduce the LRC of temperature.…”

Investigate the Applicability of CMADS and CFSR Reanalysis in Northeast China

“…They found that interannual ERA-Interim presented similar trends (decreasing gradually from southeast to northwest) with the interpolated ground station in precipitation at both annual and seasonal scales and good consistency in temperature, but caution was required when using ERA-Interim in areas with complex terrain. Zhao et al [17] quantitatively evaluated the quality of NCEP-2 and CFSR reanalysis seasonal temperature data in China using detrended fluctuation analysis and noticed that the reliabilities of reanalysis varied in different regions and seasons. Tan et al [18] recommended using Asian Precipitation-Highly-Resolved Observational Data Integration towards Evaluation of Water Resources (APHRODITE) precipitation and CFSR temperature data as inputs for modeling of Malaysian water resources, because APHRODITE data often underestimated the extreme precipitation and streamflow while CFSR data dramatically overestimated them.…”