Reply to “Comments on ‘What Is the Predictability Limit of Midlatitude Weather?’”
In their comment, Žagar and Szunyogh raised concerns about a recent study by Zhang et al. that examined the predictability limit of midlatitude weather using two up-to-date global models. Zhang et al. showed that deterministic weather forecast may, at best, be extended by 5 days, assuming we could a...
Main Authors: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Other Authors: | |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
American Meteorological Society
2020
|
Online Access: | https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/127648 |
_version_ | 1826199223482187776 |
---|---|
author | Sun, Y. Qiang Zhang, Fuqing Magnusson, Linus Buizza, Roberto Chen, Jan-Huey Emanuel, Kerry Andrew |
author2 | Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences |
author_facet | Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences Sun, Y. Qiang Zhang, Fuqing Magnusson, Linus Buizza, Roberto Chen, Jan-Huey Emanuel, Kerry Andrew |
author_sort | Sun, Y. Qiang |
collection | MIT |
description | In their comment, Žagar and Szunyogh raised concerns about a recent study by Zhang et al. that examined the predictability limit of midlatitude weather using two up-to-date global models. Zhang et al. showed that deterministic weather forecast may, at best, be extended by 5 days, assuming we could achieve minimal initial-condition uncertainty (e.g., 10% of current operational value) with a nearly perfect model. Žagar and Szunyogh questioned the methodology and the experiments of Zhang et al. Specifically, Žagar and Szunyogh raised issues regarding the effects of model error on the growth of the forecast uncertainty. They also suggested that estimates of the predictability limit could be obtained using a simple parametric model. This reply clarifies the misunderstandings in Žagar and Szunyogh and demonstrates that experiments conducted by Zhang et al. are reasonable. In our view, the model error concern in Žagar and Szunyogh does not apply to the intrinsic predictability limit, which is the key focus of Zhang et al. and the simple parametric model described in Žagar and Szunyogh does not serve the purpose of Zhang et al. |
first_indexed | 2024-09-23T11:16:42Z |
format | Article |
id | mit-1721.1/127648 |
institution | Massachusetts Institute of Technology |
language | English |
last_indexed | 2024-09-23T11:16:42Z |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | American Meteorological Society |
record_format | dspace |
spelling | mit-1721.1/1276482022-10-01T02:32:01Z Reply to “Comments on ‘What Is the Predictability Limit of Midlatitude Weather?’” Sun, Y. Qiang Zhang, Fuqing Magnusson, Linus Buizza, Roberto Chen, Jan-Huey Emanuel, Kerry Andrew Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences Lorenz Center (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) In their comment, Žagar and Szunyogh raised concerns about a recent study by Zhang et al. that examined the predictability limit of midlatitude weather using two up-to-date global models. Zhang et al. showed that deterministic weather forecast may, at best, be extended by 5 days, assuming we could achieve minimal initial-condition uncertainty (e.g., 10% of current operational value) with a nearly perfect model. Žagar and Szunyogh questioned the methodology and the experiments of Zhang et al. Specifically, Žagar and Szunyogh raised issues regarding the effects of model error on the growth of the forecast uncertainty. They also suggested that estimates of the predictability limit could be obtained using a simple parametric model. This reply clarifies the misunderstandings in Žagar and Szunyogh and demonstrates that experiments conducted by Zhang et al. are reasonable. In our view, the model error concern in Žagar and Szunyogh does not apply to the intrinsic predictability limit, which is the key focus of Zhang et al. and the simple parametric model described in Žagar and Szunyogh does not serve the purpose of Zhang et al. 2020-09-17T20:54:12Z 2020-09-17T20:54:12Z 2020-02 2019-11 2020-06-08T15:34:13Z Article http://purl.org/eprint/type/JournalArticle 0022-4928 1520-0469 https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/127648 Sun, Y. Qiang et al. "Reply to “Comments on ‘What Is the Predictability Limit of Midlatitude Weather?’”." Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences 77, 2 (February 2020): 787–793 © 2020 American Meteorological Society. en http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/jas-d-19-0308.1 Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences Article is made available in accordance with the publisher's policy and may be subject to US copyright law. Please refer to the publisher's site for terms of use. application/pdf American Meteorological Society American Meteorological Society |
spellingShingle | Sun, Y. Qiang Zhang, Fuqing Magnusson, Linus Buizza, Roberto Chen, Jan-Huey Emanuel, Kerry Andrew Reply to “Comments on ‘What Is the Predictability Limit of Midlatitude Weather?’” |
title | Reply to “Comments on ‘What Is the Predictability Limit of Midlatitude Weather?’” |
title_full | Reply to “Comments on ‘What Is the Predictability Limit of Midlatitude Weather?’” |
title_fullStr | Reply to “Comments on ‘What Is the Predictability Limit of Midlatitude Weather?’” |
title_full_unstemmed | Reply to “Comments on ‘What Is the Predictability Limit of Midlatitude Weather?’” |
title_short | Reply to “Comments on ‘What Is the Predictability Limit of Midlatitude Weather?’” |
title_sort | reply to comments on what is the predictability limit of midlatitude weather |
url | https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/127648 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sunyqiang replytocommentsonwhatisthepredictabilitylimitofmidlatitudeweather AT zhangfuqing replytocommentsonwhatisthepredictabilitylimitofmidlatitudeweather AT magnussonlinus replytocommentsonwhatisthepredictabilitylimitofmidlatitudeweather AT buizzaroberto replytocommentsonwhatisthepredictabilitylimitofmidlatitudeweather AT chenjanhuey replytocommentsonwhatisthepredictabilitylimitofmidlatitudeweather AT emanuelkerryandrew replytocommentsonwhatisthepredictabilitylimitofmidlatitudeweather |