Advertisement

Journal of Meteorological Research

, Volume 32, Issue 5, pp 794–803 | Cite as

Improving Multi-Model Ensemble Forecasts of Tropical Cyclone Intensity Using Bayesian Model Averaging

  • Xiaojiang Song
  • Yuejian Zhu
  • Jiayi Peng
  • Hong Guan
Regular Articles
  • 9 Downloads

Abstract

This paper proposes a method for multi-model ensemble forecasting based on Bayesian model averaging (BMA), aiming to improve the accuracy of tropical cyclone (TC) intensity forecasts, especially forecasts of minimum surface pressure at the cyclone center (Pmin). The multi-model ensemble comprises three operational forecast models: the Global Forecast System (GFS) of NCEP, the Hurricane Weather Research and Forecasting (HWRF) models of NCEP, and the Integrated Forecasting System (IFS) of ECMWF. The mean of a predictive distribution is taken as the BMA forecast. In this investigation, bias correction of the minimum surface pressure was applied at each forecast lead time, and the distribution (or probability density function, PDF) of Pmin was used and transformed. Based on summer season forecasts for three years, we found that the intensity errors in TC forecast from the three models varied significantly. The HWRF had a much smaller intensity error for short lead-time forecasts. To demonstrate the proposed methodology, cross validation was implemented to ensure more efficient use of the sample data and more reliable testing. Comparative analysis shows that BMA for this three-model ensemble, after bias correction and distribution transformation, provided more accurate forecasts than did the best of the ensemble members (HWRF), with a 5%–7% decrease in root-mean-square error on average. BMA also outperformed the multi-model ensemble, and it produced “predictive variance” that represented the forecast uncertainty of the member models. In a word, the BMA method used in the multi-model ensemble forecasting was successful in TC intensity forecasts, and it has the potential to be applied to routine operational forecasting.

Key words

tropical cyclone Bayesian model average intensity bias correction forecast uncertainty ensemble forecast 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank NCEP/EMC for the instruction on understanding and applying the EMC’s advanced technology in tropical cyclone forecasting and post-processing of ensemble forecasts, in particular for setting up the BMA algorithm. With their help, the first author was able to carry out an operational forecast experiment at the National Marine Environmental Forecasting Center of China and to implement related forecasting techniques applicable to operational marine forecasting in China. The authors also thank Mr. Eric Sinsky for English grammar editing.

References

  1. Chen, L. S., Y. H. Duan, L. L. Song, et al.,2012: Typhoon Forecast and Disaster. China Meteorological Press, Beijing, China, 370 pp. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  2. Chou, Y. M., A. M. Polansky, and R. L. Mason, 1998: Transforming non-normal data to normality in statistical process control. J. Qual. Technol., 30, 133–141, doi: 10.1080/00224065.1998. 11979832.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. DeMaria, M., 1996: The effect of vertical shear on tropical cyclone intensity change. J. Atmos. Sci., 53, 2076–2088, doi: 10.1175/1520-0469(1996)053<2076:TEOVSO>2.0.CO;2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. DeMaria, M., and J. Kaplan, 1999: An updated Statistical Hurricane Intensity Prediction Scheme (SHIPS) for the Atlantic and eastern North Pacific basins. Wea. Forecasting, 14, 326–337, doi: 10.1175/1520-0434(1999)014<0326:AUSHIP> 2.0.CO;2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. DeMaria, M., M. Mainelli, L. K. Shay, et al.,2005: Further improvements to the Statistical Hurricane Intensity Prediction Scheme (SHIPS). Wea. Forecasting, 20, 531–543, doi: 10.1175/WAF862.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Emanuel, K., 2000: A statistical analysis of tropical cyclone intensity. Mon. Wea. Rev., 128, 1139–1152, doi: 10.1175/1520-0493(2000)128<1139:ASAOTC>2.0.CO;2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gall, R., J. Franklin, F. Marks, et al.,2013: The hurricane forecast improvement project. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 94, 329–343, doi: 10.1175/BAMS-D-12-00071.1.Google Scholar
  8. Herr, H. D., and R. Krzysztofowicz, 2005: Generic probability distribution of rainfall in space: The bivariate model. J. Hydrol., 306, 234–263, doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2004.09.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hoeting, J. A., D. Madigan, A. E. Raftery, et al.,1999: Bayesian model averaging: A tutorial (with comments by M. Clyde, D. Draper, and E. I. George, and a rejoinder by the authors). Stat. Sci., 14, 382–417, doi: 10.1214/ss/1009212519.Google Scholar
  10. Kelly, K. S., and R. Krzysztofowicz, 1997: A bivariate meta-Gaussian density for use in hydrology. Stoch. Hydrol. Hydraul., 11, 17–31, doi: 10.1007/BF02428423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Knaff, J. A., and R. M. Zehr, 2007: Reexamination of tropical cyclone wind–pressure relationships. Wea. Forecasting, 22, 71–88, doi: 10.1175/WAF965.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Krzysztofowicz, R., 1985: Bayesian models of forecasted time series. J. Amer. Water Resour. Assoc., 21, 805–814, doi: 10.1111/j.1752-1688.1985.tb00174.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Madigan, D., and A. E. Raftery, 1994: Model selection and ac-counting for model uncertainty in graphical models using Occam’s window. J. Amer. Stat. Assoc., 89, 1535–1546, doi: 10.1080/01621459.1994.10476894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Morcrette, J.-J., O. Boucher, L. Jones, et al.,2009: Aerosol analysis and forecast in the European Centre for Medium-range Weather Forecasts integrated forecast system: Forward modeling. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos., 114, D06206, doi: 10.1029/2008 JD011235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Qian, C. H., Y. H, Duan, S. H. Ma, et al.,2012: The current status and future development of China operational typhoon forecasting and its key technologies. Adv. Meteor. Sci. Technol., 2, 36–43, doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-1973.2012.05.005. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  16. Raftery, A. E., 1993: Bayesian model selection in structural equation models. Testing Structural Equation Models, K. A. Bollen, and J. S. Long, Eds., Sage Publications, Newbury Park, 163–180.Google Scholar
  17. Raftery, A. E., T. Gneiting, F. Balabdaoui, et al.,2005: Using Bayesian model averaging to calibrate forecast ensembles. Mon. Wea. Rev., 133, 1155–1174, doi: 10.1175/MWR2906.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Slingo, J., and T. Palmer, 2011: Uncertainty in weather and climate prediction. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. A, 369, 4751–4767, doi: 10.1098/rsta.2011.0161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sloughter, J. M. L., A. E. Raftery, T. Gneiting, et al.,2007: Probabilistic quantitative precipitation forecasting using Bayesian model averaging. Mon. Wea. Rev., 135, 3209–3220, doi: 10.1175/MWR3441.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Wang, Y. Q., Y. J. Rao, Z. M. Tan, et al.,2015: A statistical analysis of the effects of vertical wind shear on tropical cyclone intensity change over the western North Pacific. Mon. Wea. Rev., 143, 3434–3453, doi: 10.1175/MWR-D-15-0049.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Westfall, P. H., 2014: Kurtosis as peakedness, 1905–2014. R.I.P. Amer. Stat., 68, 191–195, doi: 10.1080/00031305.2014.917 055.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Yu, H., S. T. Chan, B. Brown, et al.,2012: Operational tropical cyclone forecast verification practice in the western North Pacific region. Trop. Cyclone Res. Rev., 1, 361–372, doi: 10. 6057/2012TCRR03.06.Google Scholar
  23. Yu, H., P. Y. Chen, Q. Q. Li, et al.,2013: Current capability of operational numerical models in predicting tropical cyclone intensity in the western North Pacific. Wea. Forecasting, 28, 353–367, doi: 10.1175/WAF-D-11-00100.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Yu, H., G. M. Chen, and R. J. Wan, 2015: A multi-model consensus forecast technique for tropical cyclone intensity based on model output calibration. Acta Meteor. Sinica, 73, 667–678, doi: 10.11676/qxxb2015.043. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  25. Zhi, X. F., G. Li, and T. Peng, 2014: On the probabilistic forecast of 2-m temperature of a single station based on Bayesian theory. Trans. Atmos. Sci., 37, 740–748, doi: 10.13878/j.cnki. dqkxxb.20130613006. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  26. Zhi, X. F., J. Wang, C. Z. Lin, et al.,2015: Bayesian model average prediction on temperature by CMIP5 data. J. Meteor. Sci., 35, 405–412, doi: 10.3969/2014jms.0052.Google Scholar
  27. Zhu, Y. J., 2005: Ensemble forecast: A new approach to uncertainty and predictability. Adv. Atmos. Sci., 22, 781–788, doi: 10.1007/BF02918678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Zhu, Y. J., 2010: The prediction science. Trans. Atmos. Sci., 33, 266–270. (in Chinese)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Chinese Meteorological Society and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xiaojiang Song
    • 1
  • Yuejian Zhu
    • 2
  • Jiayi Peng
    • 3
  • Hong Guan
    • 4
    • 5
  1. 1.Key Laboratory of Research on Marine Hazards ForecastingNational Marine Environmental Forecasting CenterBeijingChina
  2. 2.Environmental Modeling CenterNOAA/NWS/NCEPCollege ParkUSA
  3. 3.I. M. Systems Group, Inc., and NOAA/NWS/NCEP/EMCCollege ParkUSA
  4. 4.System Research Group, Inc.Colorado SpringsUSA
  5. 5.NOAA/NWS/NCEP/EMCCollege ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations