Applications of Bayesian Procrustes shape analysis to ensemble radar reflectivity nowcast verification

Abstract This paper introduces the use of Bayesian full Procrustes shape analysis in object-oriented meteorological applications. In particular, the Procrustes methodology is used to generate mean forecast precipitation fields from a set of ensemble forecasts. This approach has advantages over other ensemble averaging techniques in that it can produce a forecast that retains the morphological features of the precipitation structures and present the range of forecast outcomes represented by the ensemble. The production of the ensemble mean avoids the problems of smoothing that result from simple pixel or cell averaging, while producing credible sets that retain information on ensemble spread. Also in this paper, the full Bayesian Procrustes scheme is used as an object verification tool for precipitation forecasts. This is an extension of a previously presented Procrustes shape analysis based verification approach into a full Bayesian format designed to handle the verification of precipitation forecasts that match objects from an ensemble of forecast fields to a single truth image. The methodology is tested on radar reflectivity nowcasts produced in the Warning Decision Support System — Integrated Information (WDSS-II) by varying parameters in the K-means cluster tracking scheme.

[1]  Neil I. Fox,et al.  A Bayesian Quantitative Precipitation Nowcast Scheme , 2005 .

[2]  I. Zawadzki,et al.  Scale Dependence of the Predictability of Precipitation from Continental Radar Images. Part II: Probability Forecasts , 2004 .

[3]  F. Bookstein,et al.  Morphometric Tools for Landmark Data: Geometry and Biology , 1999 .

[4]  Clive Pierce,et al.  Formulation and evaluation of a scale decomposition‐based stochastic precipitation nowcast scheme , 2013 .

[5]  Christian Keil,et al.  Aspects of short‐term probabilistic blending in different weather regimes , 2014 .

[6]  A. Seed,et al.  STEPS: A probabilistic precipitation forecasting scheme which merges an extrapolation nowcast with downscaled NWP , 2006 .

[7]  Jason E. Nachamkin.  Application of the Composite Method to the Spatial Forecast Verification Methods Intercomparison Dataset , 2009 .

[8]  B. Brown,et al.  Object-Based Verification of Precipitation Forecasts. Part I: Methodology and Application to Mesoscale Rain Areas , 2006 .

[9]  Athanasios C. Micheas,et al.  Cell identification and verification of QPF ensembles using shape analysis techniques , 2007 .

[10]  J. McBride,et al.  Verification of precipitation in weather systems: determination of systematic errors , 2000 .

[11]  P. K. Kundu,et al.  Optimization of Nowcast Software WDSS-II for operational application over the Indian region , 2014, Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics.

[12]  C. Keil,et al.  A Displacement and Amplitude Score Employing an Optical Flow Technique , 2009 .

[13]  M. Rodwell,et al.  Intercomparison of Global Model Precipitation Forecast Skill in 2010/11 Using the SEEPS Score , 2012 .

[14]  D. Rezácová,et al.  Using the fractions skill score to assess the relationship between an ensemble QPF spread and skill , 2009 .

[15]  Susan Joslyn,et al.  Progress and challenges in forecast verification , 2013 .

[16]  Dipak K. Dey,et al.  Modeling shape distributions and inferences for assessing differences in shapes , 2005 .

[17]  Elizabeth E. Ebert,et al.  Toward Better Understanding of the Contiguous Rain Area (CRA) Method for Spatial Forecast Verification , 2009 .

[18]  Arthur Witt,et al.  The Storm Cell Identification and Tracking Algorithm: An Enhanced WSR-88D Algorithm , 1998 .

[19]  Caren Marzban,et al.  Verification with Variograms , 2009 .

[20]  K. Mardia,et al.  Statistical Shape Analysis , 1998 .

[21]  Athanasios C. Micheas,et al.  Bayesian Procrustes analysis with applications to hydrology , 2010 .

[22]  Marion Mittermaier,et al.  A long‐term assessment of precipitation forecast skill using the Fractions Skill Score , 2013 .

[23]  Manfred Dorninger,et al.  Quantifying verification uncertainty by reference data variation , 2012 .

[24]  Anna Ghelli,et al.  Observational probability method to assess ensemble precipitation forecasts , 2012 .

[25]  Travis M. Smith,et al.  The Warning Decision Support System–Integrated Information , 2007 .

[26]  Ke Xu,et al.  A Kernel-Based Spatio-Temporal Dynamical Model for Nowcasting Weather Radar Reflectivities , 2005 .

[27]  Neil I. Fox,et al.  An Object-Oriented Multiscale Verification Scheme , 2010 .

[28]  D. Stoyan,et al.  Fractals, random shapes and point fields : methods of geometrical statistics , 1996 .

[29]  Athanasios C. Micheas,et al.  Complex elliptical distributions with application to shape analysis , 2006 .

[30]  George C. Craig,et al.  Blending a probabilistic nowcasting method with a high‐resolution numerical weather prediction ensemble for convective precipitation forecasts , 2012 .

[31]  A. Seed.  A Dynamic and Spatial Scaling Approach to Advection Forecasting , 2001 .

[32]  Manfred Dorninger,et al.  Comparison of NWP-model chains by using novel verification methods , 2013 .

[33]  Eric Gilleland,et al.  Intercomparison of Spatial Forecast Verification Methods , 2009 .

[34]  J. M. Sloughter,et al.  Probabilistic Quantitative Precipitation Forecasting Using Bayesian Model Averaging , 2007 .

[35]  Robert M. Rabin,et al.  Multiscale storm identification and forecast , 2003 .

[36]  E. Chornoboy,et al.  Automated storm tracking for terminal air traffic control , 1995 .

[37]  Valliappa Lakshmanan,et al.  Tuning AutoNowcaster Automatically , 2012 .

[38]  M. Dixon,et al.  TITAN: Thunderstorm Identification, Tracking, Analysis, and Nowcasting—A Radar-based Methodology , 1993 .

[39]  I. Zawadzki,et al.  Predictability of Precipitation from Continental Radar Images. Part III: Operational Nowcasting Implementation (MAPLE) , 2004 .

[40]  V. Lakshmanan,et al.  A Gaussian Mixture Model Approach to Forecast Verification , 2010 .