Search

The scientific literature has many studies evaluating numerical weather prediction (NWP) models. However, many of those studies averaged across a myriad of different atmospheric conditions and surface forcings that can obfuscate the atmospheric conditions when NWP models perform well versus when they perform inadequately. To help isolate these different weather conditions, we used observations from the U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN) obtained between 1 January and 31 December 2021 to distinguish among different near-surface atmospheric conditions [i.e., different near-surface heating rates ( d T / d t ), incoming shortwave radiation (SWd) regimes, and 5-cm soil moisture (SM05)] to evaluate the High-Resolution Rapid Refresh (HRRR) Model, which is a 3-km model used for operational weather forecasting in the United States. On days with small (large) d T / d t , we found afternoon T biases of about 2°C (−1°C) and afternoon SWd biases of up to 170 W m−2 (100 W m−2), but negligible impacts on SM05 biases. On days with small (large) SWd, we found daytime temperature biases of about 3°C (−2.5°C) and daytime SWd biases of up to 190 W m−2 (80 W m−2). Whereas different SM05 had little impact on T and SWd biases, dry (wet) conditions had positive (negative) SM05 biases. We argue that the proper evaluation of weather forecasting models requires careful consideration of different near-surface atmospheric conditions and is critical to better identify model deficiencies in order to support improvements to the parameterization schemes used therein. A similar, regime-specific verification approach may also be used to help evaluate other geophysical models. Significance Statement: Improving weather forecasting models requires careful evaluations against high-quality observations. We used observations from the U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN) and found that the performance of the High-Resolution Rapid Refresh (HRRR) Model varies as a function of differences in near-surface heating and solar radiation. This finding indicates that model evaluations need to be conducted under varying near-surface weather conditions rather than averaging across multiple weather types. This new approach will allow for model developers to better identify model deficiencies and is a useful step to helping improve weather forecasts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most climate models in phase 6 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) still suffer pronounced warm and dry summer biases in the central United States (CUS), even in high-resolution simulations. We found that the cloud base definition in the cumulus parameterization was the dominant factor determining the spread of the biases among models and those defining cloud base at the lifting condensation level (LCL) performed the best. To identify the underlying mechanisms, we developed a physically based analytical bias model (ABM) to capture the key feedback processes of land–atmosphere coupling. The ABM has significant explanatory power, capturing 80% variance of temperature and precipitation biases among all models. Our ABM analysis via counterfactual experiments indicated that the biases are attributed mostly by surface downwelling longwave radiation errors and second by surface net shortwave radiation errors, with the former 2–5 times larger. The effective radiative forcing from these two errors as weighted by their relative contributions induces runaway temperature and precipitation feedbacks, which collaborate to cause CUS summer warm and dry biases. The LCL cumulus reduces the biases through two key mechanisms: it produces more clouds and less precipitable water, which reduce radiative energy input for both surface heating and evapotranspiration to cause a cooler and wetter soil; it produces more rainfall and wetter soil conditions, which suppress the positive evapotranspiration–precipitation feedback to damp the warm and dry bias coupling. Most models using non-LCL schemes underestimate both precipitation and cloud amounts, which amplify the positive feedback to cause significant biases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Examines the conventional soil temperature data for computing soil heat flux and air-vegetation-soil layer at meteorological surface stations in Oklahoma. Application of the method to the Oklahoma Mesonet data; Retrieval of top soil layer water content and surface skin temperature; Impact of land surface characteristics on mesoscale variabilities.