Abstract
AbstractTwo high resolution quantitative precipitation forecasts with different levels of realism are evaluated. Classical scores (bias, correlation and scores based on contingency tables) confirm that the two forecasts do not have the same quality. A multi‐scale extension of these scores has then been made to produce a validation for hydrological purposes. Rainfall fields are integrated over surfaces of various scales. For better simulation, scores indicate an increase in the quality of the simulated precipitation for larger surfaces (typically more than 100 km2): the localisation errors are reduced by the aggregation. This helps to determine the usefulness of such forecasts for hydrological purposes. Copyright © 2006 Royal Meteorological Society.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
