Skip to main content
Log in

The effects of bias, drift, and trends in calculating anomalies for evaluating skill of seasonal-to-decadal initialized climate predictions

  • Published:
Climate Dynamics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In initialized seasonal to decadal (S2D) predictions, model hindcasts rapidly drift away from the initial observed state and converge toward a preferred state characterized by systematic error, or bias. Bias and drift are among the greatest challenges facing initialized prediction today. Differences in trends between initial states and drifted states, combined with bias and drift, introduce complexities in calculating anomalies to assess skill of initialized predictions. We examine several methods of calculating anomalies using the Decadal Prediction Large Ensemble (DPLE) using the Community Earth System Model (CESM) initialized hindcasts and focus on Pacific and Atlantic SSTs to illustrate issues with anomaly calculations. Three methods of computing anomalies, one as differences from a long term model climatology, another as bias-adjusted differences from the previous 15 year average from observations, and a third as differences from the previous 15 year average from the model, are contrasted and each is shown to have limitations. For the first, trends in bias and drift introduce higher skill estimates earlier and later in the hindcast period due to the trends that contribute to skill. For the second, higher skill can be introduced in situations where low frequency variability in the observations is large compared to the hindcasts on timescales greater than 15 years, while lower skill can result if the predicted signal is small and the bias-correction itself produces a transition of SST anomalies to the opposite sign of those that are observed. The third method has somewhat lower skill compared to each of the others, but has less difficulties with not only the long term trends in the model climatology, but also with the unrealistic situational skill from using observations as a reference. However, the first 15 years of the hindcast period cannot be evaluated due to having to wait to accumulate the previous 15 year model climatology before the method can be applied. The IPO transition in the 2014–2016 time frame from negative to positive (predicted by Meehl et al. in in Nat Commun, 10.1038/NCOMMS11718, 2016) did indeed verify using all three methods, though each provides somewhat different skill values as a result of the respective limitations. There is no clear best method, as all are roughly comparable, and each has its own set of limitations and caveats. However, all three methods show generally higher overall skill in the AMO region compared to the IPO region.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and material

The output from CESM-DPLE (as well as from the CORE* simulation used to initialize the ocean and sea ice components) is available as raw, single-variable time series files. A web page (www.cesm.ucar.edu/projects/community-projects/DPLE) provides specifics about the simulations, links to the data, a publication list, and additional overview diagnostics for select fields. The companion CESM-LE simulation set has similar web documentation (www.cesm.ucar.edu/projects/community-projects/LENS), including links to output and relevant publications. HadiSST observations are available at https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadisst/data/download.html. NCEP/NCAR reanalyses files are by anonymous FTP from ftp.cdc.noaa.gov in /Datasets/ncep.reanalysis.derived/sigma.

Code availability

NCL plotting routines are available at https://www.ncl.ucar.edu/Document/Functions/list_alpha.shtml.

References

Download references

Acknowledgements

Portions of this study were supported by the Regional and Global Model Analysis (RGMA) component of the Earth and Environmental System Modeling Program of the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Biological & Environmental Research (BER) via National Science Foundation IA 1947282 , and under Award Number DE-SC0022070. This work also was supported by the National Center for Atmospheric Research, which is a major facility sponsored by the National Science Foundation (NSF) under Cooperative Agreement No. 1852977. DS was supported by the Met Office Hadley Centre Climate Programme funded by BEIS and Defra and by the European Commission Horizon 2020 EUCP project (GA 776613). FJDR was also supported by the EUCP project and the CLINSA project CGL2017-85791-R) funded by the AEI. The CESM-DPLE was generated using computational resources provided by the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center, which is supported by the Office of Science of the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC02-05CH11231, as well as by an Accelerated Scientific Discovery grant for Cheyenne (https://doi.org/10.5065/D6RX99HX) that was awarded by NCAR’s Computational and Information Systems Laboratory.

Funding

Portions of this study were supported by the Regional and Global Model Analysis (RGMA) component of the Earth and Environmental System Modeling Program of the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Biological & Environmental Research (BER) via National Science Foundation IA 1947282, and under Award Number DE-SC0022070. This work also was supported by the National Center for Atmospheric Research, which is a major facility sponsored by the National Science Foundation (NSF) under Cooperative Agreement No. 1852977. DS was supported by the Met Office Hadley Centre Climate Programme funded by BEIS and Defra and by the European Commission Horizon 2020 EUCP project (GA 776613). FJDR was also supported by the EUCP project and the CLINSA project CGL2017-85791-R) funded by the AEI.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gerald A. Meehl.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest/Competing interests

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest or competing interests regarding the publication of this paper.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Meehl, G.A., Teng, H., Smith, D. et al. The effects of bias, drift, and trends in calculating anomalies for evaluating skill of seasonal-to-decadal initialized climate predictions. Clim Dyn 59, 3373–3389 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-022-06272-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-022-06272-7

Keywords

Navigation