A general comprehensive evaluation method for cross-scale precipitation forecasts

Abstract

Abstract. With the development of refined numerical forecasts, problems such as score distortion due to the division of precipitation thresholds in both traditional and improved scoring methods for precipitation forecasts and the increasing subjective risk arising from the scale setting of the neighborhood spatial verification method have become increasingly prominent. To address these issues, a general comprehensive evaluation method (GCEM) is developed for cross-scale precipitation forecasts by directly analyzing the proximity of precipitation forecasts and observations in this study. In addition to the core indicator of the precipitation accuracy score (PAS), the GCEM system also includes score indices for insufficient precipitation forecasts, excessive precipitation forecasts, precipitation forecast biases, and clear/rainy forecasts. The PAS does not distinguish the magnitude of precipitation and does not delimit the area of influence; it constitutes a fair scoring formula with objective performance and can be suitable for evaluating rainfall events such as general and extreme precipitation. The PAS can be used to calculate the accuracy of numerical models or quantitative precipitation forecasts, enabling the quantitative evaluation of the comprehensive capability of various refined precipitation forecasting products. Based on the GCEM, comparative experiments between the PAS and threat score (TS) are conducted for two typical precipitation weather processes. The results show that relative to the TS, the PAS better aligns with subjective expectations, indicating that the PAS is more reasonable than the TS. In the case of an extreme-precipitation event in Henan, China, two high-resolution models were evaluated using the PAS, TS, and fraction skill score (FSS), verifying the evaluation ability of PAS scoring for predicting extreme-precipitation events. In addition, other indices of the GCEM are utilized to analyze the range and extent of both insufficient and excessive forecasts of precipitation, as well as the precipitation forecasting ability for different weather processes. These indices not only provide overall scores similar to those of the TS for individual cases but also support two-dimensional score distribution plots which can comprehensively reflect the performance and characteristics of precipitation forecasts. Both theoretical and practical applications demonstrate that the GCEM exhibits distinct advantages and potential promotion and application value compared to the various mainstream precipitation forecast verification methods.