横断山区模式降水预报质量检验——以丽江市为例
Quality Test of Precipitation Forecasting of Numerical Models in Hengduan Mountain—A Case Study of Lijiang
摘要: 为充分了解全球数值预报模式和中国气象局数值业务区域模式(CMA区域模式)在丽江市的预报效果,本研究对欧洲中心全球模式(ECMWF)、中尺度天气数值预报系统(CMA-MESO)、上海数值预报模式系统(CMA-SH9)、广东快速更新同化数值预报系统(CMA-GD)、云南区域模式(科研所WRF)、中国气象局全球同化预报系统(CMA-GFS)共6种数值预报模式的降水要素进行了晴雨预报与分级降水预报检验。结果显示:1) 欧洲中心全球模式晴雨预报正确率低于国产模式,且国产模式中以科研所WRF和CMA-SH9准确率最高。2) 随着降水量级增大,各模式TS评分和预报偏差显著下降,空报率和漏报率显著上升,且各模式对于小雨量级具有较好的预报效果。随着预报时效增长,各模式检验指标无显著差异,但其变化趋势与降水量级间表现一致。3) 综合多个模式的预报检验结果,丽江市进行晴雨预报和降水预报时可着重参考CMA-SH9、科研所WRF和CMA-GD这3种国产数值模式。
Abstract: In order to fully understand the forecasting effect of the global numerical prediction model and the numerical operational regional model (CMA regional model) of the China Meteorological Administration in Hengduan Mountain, this study evaluated the prediction results of barometer and graded rainfall precipitation in Lijiang of six numerical prediction models, the European Central Global Model (ECMWF), CMA-MESO, CMA-SH9, CMA-GD, WRF of the Research Institute and CMA-GFS. The results showed that: 1) The accuracy of ECMWF is lower than that of the domestic models, and the accuracy of the domestic model WRF and CMA-SH9 is the highest. 2) With the increase of precipitation, the TS score and forecast deviation of all models decrease significantly, and the empty reporting rate and underreporting rate increase significantly, and all models have a good forecasting effect on light rain. With the increase of forecast duration, there are no significant differences between the test indicators of each model, the varied trend is consistent with that of precipitation levels. 3) Based on the forecast results of multiple models, three domestic numerical models can be used to refer to CMA-SH9, WRF and CMA-GD in Lijiang for weather and precipitation forecasting firstly.
文章引用:马妍, 靳宗许, 和丽云, 董自香. 横断山区模式降水预报质量检验——以丽江市为例[J]. 气候变化研究快报, 2024, 13(3): 582-591. https://doi.org/10.12677/ccrl.2024.133065

参考文献

[1] 吴徐燕. 广州GRAPES模式与EC模式广西地面要素预报检验评估——以2019年汛期为例[J]. 农业与技术, 2020, 40(18): 108-111.
[2] 王晓峰, 周荣卫. 全球模式降水预报在雅砻江流域汛期的效果检验[J]. 气象, 2021, 47(10): 1193-1205.
[3] 徐同, 杨玉华, 李佳, 等. SMS-WARMS V2.0模式对中国西南地区降水预报能力的客观检验[J]. 气象, 2019, 45(8): 1065-1074.
[4] 刘静, 任川, 赵梓淇, 等. 多区域高分辨率模式强降水预报检验分析[J]. 气象, 2022, 48(10): 1292-1302.
[5] 赵宁坤, 张秀年, 孙俊奎, 等. 高分辨率区域模式降水预报在云南的检验[J]. 暴雨灾害,2021, 40(1): 78-86.
[6] 李华宏, 王曼, 曹杰, 等. WRF模式在云南一次强降水过程中的应用[J]. 云南大学学报(自然科学版), 2014, 36(4): 538-545.
[7] 段旭, 王曼, 陈新梅, 等. 中尺度WRF数值模式系统本地化业务试验[J]. 气象, 2011, 37(1): 39-47.
[8] 邹阳, 孙俊奎, 王将. WRF模式对昆明降水量预报的模拟检验[J]. 云南地理环境研究, 2018, 30(1): 57-64.
[9] 朱莉, 王曼, 李华宏, 等. 基于WRF模式的云南短时强降水物理量特征[J]. 大气科学学报, 2019, 42(5): 755-768.
[10] 赵韬, 周泓, 杨靖新, 等. 丽江市汛期2次暴雨天气过程对比分析[J]. 云南大学学报(自然科学版), 2016, 38(S1): 93-102.
[11] Gofa, F., Boucouvala, D., Louka, P., et al. (2017) Spatial Verification Approaches as a Tool to Evaluate the Performance of High Resolution Precipitation Forecasts. Atmospheric Research, 208, 78-87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[12] 李珊珊, 涂静, 陈玉梅, 等. 2023年广东龙舟水特征及模式降水预报检验[J]. 广东气象, 2023, 45(5): 44-47.
[13] 李璠, 王曼, 张瑾文. 华东区域数值预报降水产品在云南区域的检验评估[J]. 云南地理环境研究, 2020, 32(3): 34-40.