The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 9:30 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 1 hour.
2016
DOI: 10.3390/atmos7070094
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of Temperature and Humidity Profiles of Unified Model and ECMWF Analyses Using GRUAN Radiosonde Observations

Abstract: Temperature and water vapor profiles from the Korea Meteorological Administration (KMA) and the United Kingdom Met Office (UKMO) Unified Model (UM) data assimilation systems and from reanalysis fields from the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) were assessed using collocated radiosonde observations from the Global Climate Observing System (GCOS) Reference Upper-Air Network (GRUAN) for January-December 2012. The motivation was to examine the overall performance of data assimilation outpu… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
15
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
1
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Reanalysis outputs based on past radiosonde data, also assimilating satellite data when available, offer multiple-level, globally gridded, synopticscale moisture fields up to four times daily from a beginning year (e.g., 1948 in NCEP/NCAR Reanalysis 1; 1979 in NCEP/NCAR Reanalysis 2 and ECMWF's ERA-Interim) to present time -even though radiosonde observations are scarce over the ocean, unevenly spaced over land, and taken normally twice a day, with significant differences in vertical coverage. Naturally, since air moisture is highly variable in time and space, humidity data from different reanalysis models show discrepancies and can differ significantly from the collocated radiosonde data (e.g., Noh et al, 2016). Therefore, the radiosonde archives represent the primary source of information on the short-and long-term distribution of moisture in the troposphere, despite various data inhomogeneities.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Reanalysis outputs based on past radiosonde data, also assimilating satellite data when available, offer multiple-level, globally gridded, synopticscale moisture fields up to four times daily from a beginning year (e.g., 1948 in NCEP/NCAR Reanalysis 1; 1979 in NCEP/NCAR Reanalysis 2 and ECMWF's ERA-Interim) to present time -even though radiosonde observations are scarce over the ocean, unevenly spaced over land, and taken normally twice a day, with significant differences in vertical coverage. Naturally, since air moisture is highly variable in time and space, humidity data from different reanalysis models show discrepancies and can differ significantly from the collocated radiosonde data (e.g., Noh et al, 2016). Therefore, the radiosonde archives represent the primary source of information on the short-and long-term distribution of moisture in the troposphere, despite various data inhomogeneities.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the accuracy of model analysis differs by operational centers depending on the models and quality control schemes that the centers employ for the assimilations [27]. In addition, the accuracy of radiosonde measurements greatly depends on radiosonde types and stations [29,30], which will, in turn, affect the accuracy of NWP models that employ radiosonde data for the assimilations.…”
Section: Validation Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The diurnal variation of O-B values in the surface-sensitive channels may be attributed to NWP model skin temperatures, which are not representative of the surface temperature but of a deeper layer and held fixed over the ocean during the day [13]. The diurnal variations shown in the water vapor channels, which are not sensitive to the surface nor to clouds, may also be attributed to NWP models which are known to have diurnal variations of humidity in the upper troposphere over convective regions and have the patterns that are substantially different from that of satellite observations [26][27][28]. After the retrieval (Figure 10b,d), however, the statistics are very stable with small bias within the observation error range throughout the analyzed time period.…”
Section: Tb Departuresmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Noh et al . () used one‐year radiosonde observations from the Global Climate Observing System Reference Upper‐Air Network (GRUAN) to verify the Global UM analysis. Moist bias (approximately 3% in RH) was only found in the upper troposphere, much smaller than that in this study.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%