2019
DOI: 10.1175/bams-d-18-0137.1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

What are the Best Thermodynamic Quantity and Function to Define a Front in Gridded Model Output?

Abstract: Fronts can be computed from gridded datasets such as numerical model output and reanalyses, resulting in automated surface frontal charts and climatologies. Defining automated fronts requires quantities (e.g., potential temperature, equivalent potential temperature, wind shifts) and kinematic functions (e.g., gradient, thermal front parameter, and frontogenesis). Which are the most appropriate to use in different applications remains an open question. This question is investigated using two quantities (potenti… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
36
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 40 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 104 publications
0
36
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This method for identifying synoptic‐scale features has been tested and validated for all types of front in the Northern Hemisphere (Schemm et al ., ; Schemm and Sprenger, ; Schemm et al ., ). There are other methods that can be used for frontal identification (e.g., Simmonds et al ., ) and also variants in the method applied in this study by using different thermal front parameters (e.g., θ, Thomas and Schultz, ; θw, Berry et al ., ). In Schemm et al .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This method for identifying synoptic‐scale features has been tested and validated for all types of front in the Northern Hemisphere (Schemm et al ., ; Schemm and Sprenger, ; Schemm et al ., ). There are other methods that can be used for frontal identification (e.g., Simmonds et al ., ) and also variants in the method applied in this study by using different thermal front parameters (e.g., θ, Thomas and Schultz, ; θw, Berry et al ., ). In Schemm et al .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is no agreed definition for a front and no standard method for their detection in observations, reanalyses, or models. For a recent review of how fronts are defined and detected see Thomas and Schultz (2019). This subsection explores the sensitivity of the results to some of the definitions, detection methods, and analysis period used here.…”
Section: The Relative Importance Of Convergence Adiabatic and Diabatic Frontogenesismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While such methods are in principle objective, choosing specific approaches and configurations involves many ultimately subjective choices. Lacking a universally accepted definition of fronts, it is not inherently clear how to identify them, and consequently, many different approaches exist, as discussed in detail by Schemm et al (2018) and Thomas and Schultz (2019). Another subjective choice is involved when attributing precipitation to a front within a certain distance, which might also depend on the resolution of the available data sets.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%