2003
DOI: 10.1002/joc.969
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of the NCEP–NCAR reanalysis in terms of synoptic‐scale phenomena: a case study from the Midwestern USA

Abstract: We evaluate the ability of the National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP)-National Center for Atmosphere Research (NCAR) reanalysis to represent the synoptic-scale climate of the Midwestern USA relative to radiosonde data. Independent, automated synoptic classifications, based on rotated principal component analysis (PCA) of 500 hPa geopotential heights, 850 hPa air temperatures, and 200 hPa wind speeds and a two-step clustering algorithm, result in a 15-type NCEP-NCAR synoptic classification and a 1… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
8
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
(32 reference statements)
1
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The 10-cluster solution derived from clustering the first four PCs was successful in grouping 61% of the variance between clusters. Although these levels of explanation are similar to those encountered in other eigenvector-based studies of mid-tropospheric circulation (Horel, 1981;Kidson and Sinclair, 1995;Rohli et al, 1999;Schoof and Pryor, 2003), the remaining unexplained variation represents a source of considerable uncertainty. One example of the causes of intra-cluster variability included difficulties in classifying zonal flow.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 76%
“…The 10-cluster solution derived from clustering the first four PCs was successful in grouping 61% of the variance between clusters. Although these levels of explanation are similar to those encountered in other eigenvector-based studies of mid-tropospheric circulation (Horel, 1981;Kidson and Sinclair, 1995;Rohli et al, 1999;Schoof and Pryor, 2003), the remaining unexplained variation represents a source of considerable uncertainty. One example of the causes of intra-cluster variability included difficulties in classifying zonal flow.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 76%
“…In the second step, a nonhierarchical technique is used, while in the first step hierarchical clustering, e.g., Ref. 166, or T‐mode PCA 158 is employed. The use of T‐mode PCA in this context is methodologically different from the use of S‐mode PCA as a mere preprocessor: in the former case, PCA is a classification tool and the whole procedure can be regarded as eigenvector‐based, contrary to the latter case.…”
Section: Overview and Systematization Of Classification Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although these discontinuities are most pronounced in the Southern Hemisphere (Kistler et al, 2001) and at higher altitudes (Trenberth and Stepanik, 2002), changes in the number and nature of data sets assimilated by the reanalysis process will inevitably lead to some temporal inconsistencies. Hence, despite the clear utility of the reanalysis data sets, there is a recognized need to evaluate the reanalysis projects relative both to other reanalysis data sets and to independent data not assimilated within the reanalysis process (Hines et al, 2000;Hastenrath and Greischar, 2001;Smith et al, 2001;Marshall, 2002;Schoof and Pryor, 2003). This comparison is particularly relevant to the current application because, as described above, observations of near-surface winds over land are not assimilated by either the ECMWF or the NCEP-NCAR reanalysis models (Kalnay and Cai, 2003).…”
Section: Analysis and Comparison Of The Reanalysis Data Setsmentioning
confidence: 99%