During the 2007 NOAA Hazardous Weather Testbed Spring Experiment, the Center for Analysis and Prediction of Storms (CAPS) at the University of Oklahoma produced a daily 10-member 4-km horizontal resolution ensemble forecast covering approximately three-fourths of the continental United States. Each member used the Advanced Research version of the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF-ARW) model core, which was initialized at 2100 UTC, ran for 33 h, and resolved convection explicitly. Different initial condition (IC), lateral boundary condition (LBC), and physics perturbations were introduced in 4 of the 10 ensemble members, while the remaining 6 members used identical ICs and LBCs, differing only in terms of microphysics (MP) and planetary boundary layer (PBL) parameterizations. This study focuses on precipitation forecasts from the ensemble. The ensemble forecasts reveal WRF-ARW sensitivity to MP and PBL schemes. For example, over the 7-week experiment, the Mellor–Yamada–Janjić PBL and Ferrier MP parameterizations were associated with relatively high precipitation totals, while members configured with the Thompson MP or Yonsei University PBL scheme produced comparatively less precipitation. Additionally, different approaches for generating probabilistic ensemble guidance are explored. Specifically, a “neighborhood” approach is described and shown to considerably enhance the skill of probabilistic forecasts for precipitation when combined with a traditional technique of producing ensemble probability fields.

During the 2007 NOAA Hazardous Weather Testbed (HWT) Spring Experiment, the Center for Analysis and Prediction of Storms (CAPS) at the University of Oklahoma produced convection-allowing forecasts from a single deterministic 2-km model and a 10-member 4-km-resolution ensemble. In this study, the 2-km deterministic output was compared with forecasts from the 4-km ensemble control member. Other than the difference in horizontal resolution, the two sets of forecasts featured identical Advanced Research Weather Research and Forecasting model (ARW-WRF) configurations, including vertical resolution, forecast domain, initial and lateral boundary conditions, and physical parameterizations. Therefore, forecast disparities were attributed solely to differences in horizontal grid spacing. This study is a follow-up to similar work that was based on results from the 2005 Spring Experiment. Unlike the 2005 experiment, however, model configurations were more rigorously controlled in the present study, providing a more robust dataset and a cleaner isolation of the dependence on horizontal resolution. Additionally, in this study, the 2- and 4-km outputs were compared with 12-km forecasts from the North American Mesoscale (NAM) model. Model forecasts were analyzed using objective verification of mean hourly precipitation and visual comparison of individual events, primarily during the 21- to 33-h forecast period to examine the utility of the models as next-day guidance. On average, both the 2- and 4-km model forecasts showed substantial improvement over the 12-km NAM. However, although the 2-km forecasts produced more-detailed structures on the smallest resolvable scales, the patterns of convective initiation, evolution, and organization were remarkably similar to the 4-km output. Moreover, on average, metrics such as equitable threat score, frequency bias, and fractions skill score revealed no statistical improvement of the 2-km forecasts compared to the 4-km forecasts. These results, based on the 2007 dataset, corroborate previous findings, suggesting that decreasing horizontal grid spacing from 4 to 2 km provides little added value as next-day guidance for severe convective storm and heavy rain forecasters in the United States.

“Neighborhood approaches” have been used in two primary ways to postprocess and verify high-resolution ensemble output. While the two methods appear deceptively similar, they define events over different spatial scales and yield fields with different interpretations: the first produces probabilities interpreted as likelihood of event occurrence at the grid scale, while the second produces probabilities of event occurrence over spatial scales larger than the grid scale. Unfortunately, some studies have confused the two methods, while others did not acknowledge multiple possibilities of neighborhood approach application and simply stated, “a neighborhood approach was applied” without supporting details. Thus, this paper reviews applications of neighborhood approaches to convection-allowing ensembles in hopes of clarifying the two methods and their different event definitions. Then, using real data, it is demonstrated how the two approaches can yield statistically significantly different objective conclusions about model performance, underscoring the critical need for thorough descriptions of how neighborhood approaches are implemented and events are defined. The authors conclude by providing some recommendations for application of neighborhood approaches to convection-allowing ensembles.

This expository paper documents an experimental, real-time, 10-member, 3-km, convection-allowing ensemble prediction system (EPS) developed at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in spring 2015. The EPS is particularly unique in that continuously cycling, limited-area, mesoscale ensemble Kalman filter analyses provide diverse initial conditions. In addition to describing the EPS configurations, initial forecast assessments are presented that suggest the EPS can provide valuable severe weather guidance and skillful predictions of precipitation. The EPS output is available to operational forecasters, many of whom have incorporated the products into their toolboxes. Given such rapid embrace of an experimental system by the operational community, acceleration of convection-allowing EPS development is encouraged.

Total 550 nm aerosol optical depth, surface fine particulate matter (PM_2.5), and meteorological observations were assimilated with continuously cycling three‐dimensional variational (3DVAR), ensemble square root Kalman filter (EnSRF), and hybrid variational‐ensemble data assimilation systems. The hybrid system's background error covariances (BECs) were a blend of those in 3DVAR and produced by the cycling EnSRF system, and the 3DVAR, EnSRF, and hybrid systems differed almost exclusively by their BECs. New analyses were produced every 6 h between 0000 UTC 1 June and 1800 UTC 14 July 2010 over a domain encompassing the contiguous United States (CONUS) and adjacent areas. Additionally, a control experiment that only assimilated meteorological observations was performed. Each 1800 UTC analysis initialized a 48 h Weather Research and Forecasting with Chemistry model forecast. These forecasts were evaluated with a focus on air quality prediction. The ensemble aerosol spread was generally insufficient, particularly over the western CONUS. However, despite the suboptimal ensemble spread, the hybrid system performed quite well and usually produced the best aerosol forecasts. Additionally, both the 3DVAR‐ and EnSRF‐initialized forecasts typically outperformed the control. These results are encouraging and suggest the resiliency of the hybrid method. Improved aerosol ensembles should translate into even better future hybrid forecasts.