Verification of C&V Forecasts Jennifer Mahoney and Barbara Brown 19 April 2001.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
14 May 2001QPF Verification Workshop Verification of Probability Forecasts at Points WMO QPF Verification Workshop Prague, Czech Republic May 2001.
Advertisements

Federal Guidance on Statistical Use of Administrative Data Shelly Wilkie Martinez, Statistical and Science Policy, OIRA U. S. Office of Management and.
Learning Algorithm Evaluation
UCL global drought monitor Benjamin Lloyd-Hughes.
Validation of Satellite Precipitation Estimates for Weather and Hydrological Applications Beth Ebert BMRC, Melbourne, Australia 3 rd IPWG Workshop / 3.
Introduction to the Forecast Impact and Quality Assessment Section GSD Verification Summit Meeting 8 September 2011 Jennifer Mahoney 1.
Designing a DTC Verification System Jennifer Mahoney NOAA/ESRL 21 Feb 2007.
NWS TAF Verification Brandi Richardson NWS Shreveport, LA.
JCOMM Expert Team on Marine Climatology - Task Team on Marine-Meteorological and Oceanographic Summaries (TT-MOCS) Elizabeth Kent National Oceanography.
Daria Kluver Independent Study From Statistical Methods in the Atmospheric Sciences By Daniel Wilks.
Verification and evaluation of a national probabilistic prediction system Barbara Brown NCAR 23 September 2009.
BHS Methods in Behavioral Sciences I April 25, 2003 Chapter 6 (Ray) The Logic of Hypothesis Testing.
Paul Fajman NOAA/NWS/MDL September 7,  NDFD ugly string  NDFD Forecasts and encoding  Observations  Assumptions  Output, Scores and Display.
ISE554 The WWW 3.4 Evaluation Methods. Evaluating Interfaces with Users Why evaluation is crucial to interface design General approaches and tradeoffs.
Validity Lecture Overview Overview of the concept Different types of validity Threats to validity and strategies for handling them Examples of validity.
1 How Are We Doing? A Verification Briefing for the SAWS III Workshop April 23, 2010 Chuck Kluepfel National Weather Service Headquarters Silver Spring,
Richard (Rick)Jones Regional Training Workshop on Severe Weather Forecasting Macau, April 8 -13, 2013.
HEMS-related Aviation Weather R&D Steve Abelman Dec 18, 2013.
1 On the use of radar data to verify mesoscale model precipitation forecasts Martin Goeber and Sean Milton Model Diagnostics and Validation group Numerical.
Verification Summit AMB verification: rapid feedback to guide model development decisions Patrick Hofmann, Bill Moninger, Steve Weygandt, Curtis Alexander,
Barbara Brown 1, Ed Tollerud 2, and Tara Jensen 1 1 NCAR/RAL, Boulder, CO and DTC 2 NOAA/GSD, Boulder, CO and DTC DET: Testing and Evaluation Plan Wally.
P. Ñurmi / WWRP QPF Verification - Prague 1 Operational QPF Verification of End Products and NWP Pertti Nurmi Finnish Meteorological Institute.
1 James Brown An introduction to verifying probability forecasts RFC Verification Workshop.
Continued Development of Tropical Cyclone Wind Probability Products John A. Knaff – Presenting CIRA/Colorado State University and Mark DeMaria NOAA/NESDIS.
Quality Assessment - National Ceiling and Visibility (NCV) Analysis (now, not forecast) Product Tressa L. Fowler, Matthew J. Pocernich, Jamie T. Braid,
Event-based Verification and Evaluation of NWS Gridded Products: The EVENT Tool Missy Petty Forecast Impact and Quality Assessment Section NOAA/ESRL/GSD.
The First Step: Translating Needs to Requirements Many applications require the current and past states of the atmosphere near the surface at high spatial.
For ABA Importance of Individual Subjects Enables applied behavior analysts to discover and refine effective interventions for socially significant behaviors.
Summary of Lao CBMS (Progress Report: on-going activities)
Real-time Verification of Operational Precipitation Forecasts using Hourly Gauge Data Andrew Loughe Judy Henderson Jennifer MahoneyEdward Tollerud Real-time.
1 Ch. 1: Software Development (Read) 5 Phases of Software Life Cycle: Problem Analysis and Specification Design Implementation (Coding) Testing, Execution.
Error & Uncertainty: II CE / ENVE 424/524. Handling Error Methods for measuring and visualizing error and uncertainty vary for nominal/ordinal and interval/ratio.
HEMS Weather Summit – 21 March The Outlook for National-Scale Ceiling and Visibility Products Paul Herzegh Lead, FAA/AWRP National C&V Team.
May 24, Improving Air Quality Mapping by Adding NASA Satellite Data.
Refinement and Evaluation of Automated High-Resolution Ensemble-Based Hazard Detection Guidance Tools for Transition to NWS Operations Kick off JNTP project.
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES Office of the Federal Coordinator July 2000 Bethesda, MD.
Near Real-Time Verification At The Forecast Systems Laboratory: An Operational Perspective Michael P. Kay (CIRES/FSL/NOAA) Jennifer L. Mahoney (FSL/NOAA)
Assessment. Workshop Outline Testing and assessment Why assess? Types of tests Types of assessment Some assessment task types Backwash Qualities of a.
Software Development Problem Analysis and Specification Design Implementation (Coding) Testing, Execution and Debugging Maintenance.
Panel Discussion for the DTC Verification System 23 Feb 2007.
Basic Verification Concepts
Verification of Precipitation Areas Beth Ebert Bureau of Meteorology Research Centre Melbourne, Australia
NWS Performance Management System DRAFT PLAN FY06 Q2.
Spatial Verification Methods for Ensemble Forecasts of Low-Level Rotation in Supercells Patrick S. Skinner 1, Louis J. Wicker 1, Dustan M. Wheatley 1,2,
1 Probabilistic Forecast Verification Allen Bradley IIHR Hydroscience & Engineering The University of Iowa RFC Verification Workshop 16 August 2007 Salt.
CI VERIFICATION METHODOLOGY & PRELIMINARY RESULTS
1 Validation for CRR (PGE05) NWC SAF PAR Workshop October 2005 Madrid, Spain A. Rodríguez.
FIQAS Verification Technologies GSD Verification Summit September 8, 2011 Missy Petty.
Opportunities for Satellite Observations in Validation and Assessment Barbara Brown NCAR/RAL 19 November 2008.
Science plan S2S sub-project on verification. Objectives Recommend verification metrics and datasets for assessing forecast quality of S2S forecasts Provide.
Gridded warning verification Harold E. Brooks NOAA/National Severe Storms Laboratory Norman, Oklahoma
August 6, 2001Presented to MIT/LL The LAPS “hot start” Initializing mesoscale forecast models with active cloud and precipitation processes Paul Schultz.
Diagnostic verification and extremes: 1 st Breakout Discussed the need for toolkit to build beyond current capabilities (e.g., NCEP) Identified (and began.
Overview of SPC Efforts in Objective Verification of Convection-Allowing Models and Ensembles Israel Jirak, Chris Melick, Patrick Marsh, Andy Dean and.
Findings and Recommendations from the Hydrologic Verification System Requirements Team Peter Gabrielsen, Julie Demargne, Mary Mullusky, Kevin Werner, Bill.
Strategic Convection Products at the AWC - Review of P/CCFP experiments Presentation to Friends & Partners of Aviation Weather Jack May, Director.
2004 Developments in Aviation Forecast Guidance from the RUC Stan Benjamin Steve Weygandt NOAA / Forecast Systems Lab NY Courtesy:
User-Focused Verification Barbara Brown* NCAR July 2006
1 Application of MET for the Verification of the NWP Cloud and Precipitation Products using A-Train Satellite Observations Paul A. Kucera, Courtney Weeks,
Mike Bettwy Aviation Weather Center August 2016
TAIWIN model verification task
Spatial Verification Intercomparison Meeting, 20 February 2007, NCAR
Preface to the special issue on context-aware recommender systems
S2S sub-project on verification (and products)
Verifying and interpreting ensemble products
Binary Forecasts and Observations
Experimental Design.
Validation-Based Decision Making
Experimental Design.
Quality Assessment Activities
Presentation transcript:

Verification of C&V Forecasts Jennifer Mahoney and Barbara Brown 19 April 2001

Outline Philosophy/background –Role of QAG –General principles –General issues –Issues related to verification of C&V forecasts Background –What we have been doing? –Mechanics Verification approaches –Point vs grid methods –Verification measures Current RTVS work RTVS – How the system can be used for the C&V PDT Plans

QAG PDTs RTVS AWC/ NWS AWRP Product Quality Assessment

Functions PDTs: Developmental verification –feeds back into product development Identify appropriate verification observations Work with QAG to develop and test verification methods Provide data/results to QAG for TEG/O process RTVS: Long-term verification Evaluation of operational products –Development of baseline –Provide results for NWS reports Real-time evaluation of experimental products Example: Algorithm intercomparison exercises Implement new/improved methods and data, as available Provide data/results to QAG for TEG/O process Develop operational verification system for AWC

Functions (cont.) AWC/NWS: Provide guidance to QAG on RTVS development Monitor RTVS results Coordinate some aspects of TEG/O Provide feedback and guidance to forecasters QAG: Development and testing of verification methods Provide independent verification of products and forecasts (for PDTs, operational products, etc.) TEG/O Quality Assessment plans and reports Advise PDTs on verification approaches

Summary: QAG QAG works with product development teams and users (AWC, others) to develop, implement and test scientifically valid and statistically meaningful verification methods. –Includes research to identify appropriate observations and to develop methods QAG provides independent testing of products and produces assessment plans and reports for the TEG/O process, using statistically and scientifically valid methods.

General principles of verification Forecast quality is only one aspect of forecast “goodness” Quality  Usefulness Scientific and statistical validity Dimensionality: one number won’t do the job!! –By nature, forecast verification is a multi-dimensional problem –Different measures are concerned with different attributes (Sometimes different measures even give contradictory results) It isn’t easy to show true improvements in forecasting systems - trade-offs between scores (e.g., POD, FAR)

General issues Matching forecasts to appropriate observations –Need to match the events, including the spatial and temporal characteristics –Observation must be clearly defined, and not dependent on the forecast Selection of appropriate measures What are the important characteristics to be evaluated? Ex: Bias vs. Accuracy Discrimination vs. Threat Relative vs. Absolute verification Selection of appropriate standard of comparison Day-to-day variability in results Grid-based methods are stringent –Don’t account for small errors in timing or location –Not diagnostic (I.e., don’t provide information to help “fix” the forecasts

Issues Related to Verification of National-scale C&V Forecasts Spatial continuity of observations Accounting for temporal and spatial errors –Need for more diagnostic approaches Use of “other” observations for verification (e.g., PIREPs, satellite) Verification of probabilistic forecasts –Develop appropriate methods for spatial forecasts Others?

Current C/V work on RTVS Evaluating IFR AIRMETs issued by AWC On-going evaluation using RTVS since 1997 – –link to: Real-Time Verification System Using Metar reports to verify the forecasts Enhancing the verification methods and approaches

Mechanics Forecast/observation matching approaches –Point –Grid Time windows –At valid time –Over verification period Stratifications –With amendments –Without amendments

Verification Approaches PODy = 0.40 PODn = 0.76 FAR = 0.42 Bias = 0.70 CSI = 0.30 Point Method

Verification Approaches 1 observation in box = Yes Grid box touches polygon = In Grid Method

Verification Approaches MHH HHHH MM M M F F F FF F F F FF PODy = 0.54 PODn = 0.60 FAR = 0.62 Bias = 1.45 CSI = 0.28 Grid Method

“Standard” Verification Measures H = Hits M = Misses F = False Alarms PODy = H / (H + M) PODn = proportion of “No” area that was correctly forecast to be “No” FAR = F / (H + F) Bias = (F + H) / (M + H) CSI = H / (M + H + F) Measures “relative accuracy” TSS = PODy + PODn -1 Measures “discrimination” between Yes and No observations PODy Measures proportion of observed area that is correctly forecast to be “Yes” PODn Measures proportion of area that is correctly forecast to be “No” FAR Measures proportion of forecast convective area that is incorrect Bias Measures the extent of over- or under- forecasting Skill scores (Heidke, Gilbert) Measure the improvement in percent correct and CSI, respectively over what’s expected by chance M H F Observed storm Forecast storm

The Real Time Verification System (RTVS) For the purposes of….. Long-term assessment of NWS forecasts Algorithm development and forecast improvement NWS-forecaster assistance

The Real-Time Verification System (RTVS) RTVS Components Real-Time Continuous Data Ingest –Observation and grid ingest –Grid - to - observation interpolation –Local storage of forecasts/observation pairs User-Specified Statistical Analysis and Display via the…. Web-based interactive graphical user interface

Plans Develop, test, and implement diagnostic and operationally meaningful verification methods –First: Determine what the relevant questions are –Enhance methods as needed (i.e., as new observations become available, new types of forecasts) –Work closely with the rest of the PDT on this development Develop infrastructure so that forecasts can be verified –Enable RTVS and post-analysis software to handle PDT- developed algorithms and enhancements to verification methods –Set up real-time processing and graphical user interface

Plans (cont.) Provide on-going, independent, comprehensive assessment(s) –Begin an intercomparison exercise for C&V components and final forecasts in Fall 2002 –Real-time verification (RTVS) –In-depth post-analysis Incorporate new verification methods, observations, and forecasting systems as they are available Leverage with other verification work (including operational C&V forecasts)