SignificanceForecasts routinely provide critical information for dangerous weather events but not yet for epidemics. Researchers develop computational models that can be used for infectious disease forecasting, but forecasts have not been broadly compared or tested. We collaboratively compared forecasts from 16 teams for 8 y of dengue epidemics in Peru and Puerto Rico. The comparison highlighted components that forecasts did well (e.g., situational awareness late in the season) and those that need more work (e.g., early season forecasts). It also identified key facets to improve forecasts, including using multiple model ensemble approaches to improve overall forecast skill. Future infectious disease forecasting work can build on these findings and this framework to improve the skill and utility of forecasts.
The European CORDEX (EURO-CORDEX) initiative is a large voluntary effort that seeks to advance regional climate and Earth system science in Europe. As part of the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP)-Coordinated Regional Downscaling Experiment (CORDEX), it shares the broader goals of providing a model evaluation and climate projection framework and improving communication with both the General Circulation Model (GCM) and climate data user communities. EURO-CORDEX oversees the design and coordination of ongoing ensembles of regional climate projections of unprecedented size and resolution (0.11 • EUR-11 and 0.44 • EUR-44 domains). Additionally, the inclusion of empiricalstatistical downscaling allows investigation of much larger multi-model ensembles. These complementary approaches provide a foundation for scientific studies within the climate research community and others. The value of the EURO-CORDEX ensemble is shown via numerous peer-reviewed studies and its use in the development of climate services. Evaluations of the EUR-44 and EUR-11 ensembles also show the benefits of higher resolution. However, significant challenges remain. To further advance scientific understanding, two flagship pilot studies (FPS) were initiated. The first investigates local-regional phenomena at convection-permitting scales over central Europe and the Mediterranean in collaboration with the Med-CORDEX community. The second investigates the impacts of land cover changes on European climate across spatial and temporal scales. Over the coming years, the EURO-CORDEX community looks forward to closer collaboration with other communities, new advances, supporting international initiatives such as the IPCC reports, and continuing to provide the basis for research on regional climate impacts and adaptation in Europe.
The seasonal dependence of Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model surface temperature biases and sensitivity to planetary boundary layer (PBL) schemes are jointly explored. For this purpose, the year 2001 was simulated using three different PBL schemes in a domain covering all Europe. The simulations were compared with gridded observations, upper-air data and high-frequency station data. Seasonal and daily cycles were analysed, aimed at providing a link between long-term biases and restricted case studies. The results show that the model mean bias significantly depends on the season, being warm in winter and cold in summer. The winter warm bias is related to misrepresented cold extremes, while a systematic cold bias dominates the whole temperature range in summer. Regarding PBL schemes, an overall underestimation of the entrainment is found, with the non-local Yonsei University scheme producing systematically warmer temperatures. It is shown that the opposite seasonal biases and systematic behaviour of the PBL schemes during the year lead to a different best-performing scheme in winter and summer. Moreover, the best-performing PBL scheme in an average sense is a result of the compensation of errors. The average summer results can be partially explained by a detailed case study. It is concluded that short-term studies should be used with caution to decide on the parametrizations to be used in long-term simulations.
Abstract. In the current work we present six hindcast WRF (Weather Research and Forecasting model) simulations for the EURO-CORDEX (European Coordinated Regional Climate Downscaling Experiment) domain with different configurations in microphysics, convection and radiation for the time period 1990–2008. All regional model simulations are forced by the ERA-Interim reanalysis and have the same spatial resolution (0.44°). These simulations are evaluated for surface temperature, precipitation, short- and longwave downward radiation at the surface and total cloud cover. The analysis of the WRF ensemble indicates systematic temperature and precipitation biases, which are linked to different physical mechanisms in the summer and winter seasons. Overestimation of total cloud cover and underestimation of downward shortwave radiation at the surface, mostly linked to the Grell–Devenyi convection and CAM (Community Atmosphere Model) radiation schemes, intensifies the negative bias in summer temperatures over northern Europe (max −2.5 °C). Conversely, a strong positive bias in downward shortwave radiation in summer over central (40–60%) and southern Europe mitigates the systematic cold bias over these regions, signifying a typical case of error compensation. Maximum winter cold biases are over northeastern Europe (−2.8 °C); this location suggests that land–atmosphere rather than cloud–radiation interactions are to blame. Precipitation is overestimated in summer by all model configurations, especially the higher quantiles which are associated with summertime deep cumulus convection. The largest precipitation biases are produced by the Kain–Fritsch convection scheme over the Mediterranean. Precipitation biases in winter are lower than those for summer in all model configurations (15–30%). The results of this study indicate the importance of evaluating not only the basic climatic parameters of interest for climate change applications (temperature and precipitation), but also other components of the energy and water cycle, in order to identify the sources of systematic biases, possible compensatory or masking mechanisms and suggest pathways for model improvement.
Interactions between the land surface and the atmosphere play a fundamental role in the weather and climate system. Here we present a comparison of summertime land‐atmosphere coupling strength found in a subset of the ERA‐Interim‐driven European domain Coordinated Regional Climate Downscaling Experiment (EURO‐CORDEX) model ensemble (1989–2008). Most of the regional climate models (RCMs) reproduce the overall soil moisture interannual variability, spatial patterns, and annual cycles of surface exchange fluxes for the different European climate zones suggested by the observational Global Land Evaporation Amsterdam Model (GLEAM) and FLUXNET data sets. However, some RCMs differ substantially from FLUXNET observations for some regions. The coupling strength is quantified by the correlation between the surface sensible and the latent heat flux, and by the correlation between the latent heat flux and 2 m temperature. The first correlation is compared to its estimate from the few available long‐term European high‐quality FLUXNET observations, and the latter to results from gridded GLEAM data. The RCM simulations agree with both observational datasets in the large‐scale pattern characterized by strong coupling in southern Europe and weak coupling in northern Europe. However, in the transition zone from strong to weak coupling covering large parts of central Europe many of the RCMs tend to overestimate the coupling strength in comparison to both FLUXNET and GLEAM. The RCM ensemble spread is caused primarily by the different land surface models applied, and by the model‐specific weather conditions resulting from different atmospheric parameterizations.
European Union FP7, Royal Society, and National Science Foundation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.