2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosres.2009.03.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The sensitivity of numerical forecasts to convective parameterization during the warm period and the use of lightning data as an indicator for convective occurrence

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
19
0
3

Year Published

2011
2011
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
2
19
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…The calculation of the statistical scores (Table 1) revealed a decreasing trend of the Prob- ability of Detection (POD) with increasing rain threshold, with a POD of 0.42 for the highest precipitation amounts. This result is in agreement with the verification results of similar activities of high-resolution rain forecasts in the Mediterranean area [44][45][46]. On the other hand, the calculated False Alarm Ratio (FAR) was very low (lower than 0.17) for all rain thresholds, indicating that the model has no tendency to provide false alarms.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 79%
“…The calculation of the statistical scores (Table 1) revealed a decreasing trend of the Prob- ability of Detection (POD) with increasing rain threshold, with a POD of 0.42 for the highest precipitation amounts. This result is in agreement with the verification results of similar activities of high-resolution rain forecasts in the Mediterranean area [44][45][46]. On the other hand, the calculated False Alarm Ratio (FAR) was very low (lower than 0.17) for all rain thresholds, indicating that the model has no tendency to provide false alarms.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 79%
“…With this data, a 2x2 contingency table (Martin et al, 2010) is then constructed for some precipitation thresholds. The values selected are those used by Bartzokas et al (2010) contingency tables generated, categorical statistical scores are computed in order to describe particular aspects of precipitation forecast performance (Mazarakis et al, 2009). The categorical statistics include the accuracy (AC), bias score (BIAS), probability of detection (POD), false alarm ratio (FAR), threat score (CSI) and the Heidke skill score (HSS).…”
Section: Verification Proceduresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In general, the implementation of the KF CPS during the warm period of the year over Greece suffers from small values of Frequency Bias (see Sect. 4.2 for the definition of Frequency Bias), especially for moderate and large amounts of rain (Mazarakis et al, 2009). To alleviate this effect, the coefficient (a) 0.5 (EASYTRIG1) and (b) 1.0 (EASYTRIG2) has been added to the left-hand side of the trigger function, forcing the scheme to be triggered more easily.…”
Section: Changes To the Trigger Function (Easytrig1 Easytrig2)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other problems are the erroneous placement of the convective activity and the failure of the representation of propagating convection (Davis et al, 2003). In particular, the quantitative precipitation forecast (QPF) above the Greek peninsula mainly suffers from N. Mazarakis et al: Precipitation forecast sensitivity to modifications of Kain-Fritsch scheme the two aforementioned problems (Kotroni and Lagouvardos, 2004;Mazarakis et al, 2009).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation