2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.dynatmoce.2016.06.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

MJO prediction skill, predictability, and teleconnection impacts in the Beijing Climate Center Atmospheric General Circulation Model

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

9
35
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 45 publications
(44 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
9
35
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As PWV variability in the Chajnantor region is related to atmospheric circulation and Rossby wave activity (Falvey and Garreaud, ), linking PWV to the MJO may extend PWV predictability and be useful to operational scheduling at the site, particularly given that forecasts of PWV from the Global Forecast System (GFS) model drop below skill (correlation) of 0.7 after about 120 h (Sarazin et al ., ). The MJO has shown statistically significant predictability in global NWP models well beyond 120 h. For example, prediction skill of the RMM indices of approximately 21 days (Kim et al ., ) was found in the Climate Forecast System version 2 (CFSv2), of 3–4 weeks (Xiang et al ., ) in the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) model, of 27 days (Miyakawa et al ., ) in the Nonhydrostatic Icosahedral Atmospheric Model (NICAM), and of 16–17 days (Wu et al ., ) in an ensemble of the Beijing Climate Center Atmospheric General Circulation Model. All of these studies suggest that the tropical MJO can act as an effective bridge into subseasonal prediction of extratropical atmospheric events (Jones, ), including PWV amounts in the Chajnantor region.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As PWV variability in the Chajnantor region is related to atmospheric circulation and Rossby wave activity (Falvey and Garreaud, ), linking PWV to the MJO may extend PWV predictability and be useful to operational scheduling at the site, particularly given that forecasts of PWV from the Global Forecast System (GFS) model drop below skill (correlation) of 0.7 after about 120 h (Sarazin et al ., ). The MJO has shown statistically significant predictability in global NWP models well beyond 120 h. For example, prediction skill of the RMM indices of approximately 21 days (Kim et al ., ) was found in the Climate Forecast System version 2 (CFSv2), of 3–4 weeks (Xiang et al ., ) in the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) model, of 27 days (Miyakawa et al ., ) in the Nonhydrostatic Icosahedral Atmospheric Model (NICAM), and of 16–17 days (Wu et al ., ) in an ensemble of the Beijing Climate Center Atmospheric General Circulation Model. All of these studies suggest that the tropical MJO can act as an effective bridge into subseasonal prediction of extratropical atmospheric events (Jones, ), including PWV amounts in the Chajnantor region.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recent notable studies of the influence of tropical‐extratropical interactions on forecast skill have used reforecasts made with full GCMs (see Hamill & Kiladis, ; Scaife et al, ; Vitart & Molteni, ; Vitart, ; Wu et al, for recent examples) and re‐forecasts made with statistical models, in particular the Linear Inverse Model (LIM), (e.g., Newman et al, ; Pegion & Sardeshmukh, ; Winkler et al, ). Vitart and Molteni () targeted the response of the extratropics to the MJO‐related tropical diabatic heating in ECMWF forecasts out to 15 days and find that the response in the North Atlantic bears the same time‐lagged relationship to the MJO as found by Cassou () and Lin et al (): positive NAO phase is preferentially excited about 10 days after the MJO heating is in the Indian Ocean (phase 3 of the MJO), while the MJO heating in the western Pacific (phase 6) is correlated with the appearance of the negative NAO phase 10 days later.…”
Section: Forecasting Tropical‐extratropical Interactionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…MJO prediction skill is also suggested to be dependent on its initial and target amplitudes, with higher skills for the strong cases than the weak ones (Lin et al, 2008;Rashid et al, 2011;Xiang et al, 2015;Wu, Ren, Zuo, et al, 2016). Here, we emphasize that the improvement of prediction skill is more apparent for the initially weak cases than for the strong cases ( Figure 3a).…”
Section: Journal Of Geophysical Research: Atmospheresmentioning
confidence: 70%
“…On the other hand, better ocean initial conditions also advance the MJO prediction skill in the operational dynamical model (Fu et al, 2013;Liu et al, 2017). Essentially, the moisture initialization was included in some dynamic subseasonal to seasonal (S2S) prediction models (Fu et al, 2013;Vitart, 2014;Wang et al, 2014) but was not included in others, such as Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) coupled model (Xiang et al, 2015), the BCC S2S operational model (Liu et al, 2017;Wu, Ren, Zuo, et al, 2016), and the regional simulation study conducted by Weather Research and Forecasting model . Therefore, a realistic initial moisture condition could be crucial for MJO prediction , which is also well-known sensitive to the convective parameterization in dynamical models (Klingaman & Woolnough, 2014).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation