Unregistered User
(Unregistered)
Tue Feb 14 2006 07:14 PM
Re: 2005 Forecast model performance

Ah, a statistics question!

Best is relative:

1. Is the model that got 5 storms perfect but missed the remaining 20 storms by over 500nm to the south the best?
2. Is the model that never got one right but got half right by being off exactly 300nm north and the other half exactly 300nm south best?

The first one you had 5 right, but the average is skewed way south so you're likely to get bad predictions southward with the storm, thus it is inaccurate.

The 2nd one you know you are always in the envelope, and by manipulating statistics, you can even say that, "the model predicted the average path of every storm correctly," becuase (300N + 300S)/2 = (0N)/2 = 0nm off.

---

Now, on to the opinions

GFDL, when it was correct, was very correct. When it was wrong, it was very wrong. It was more often correct than wrong. GFS and NOGAPS were ok, not great, but not bad. BAM was often really bad, but occasionally correct (usually when GFDL was wrong). CMC was erratic - sometimes right sometimes wrong and no commonality when.

That's my observations. Anyone have anything official?




Note: This is NOT an official page. It is run by weather hobbyists and should not be used as a replacement for official sources. 
CFHC's main servers are currently located at Hostdime.com in Orlando, FL.
Image Server Network thanks to Mike Potts and Amazon Web Services. If you have static file hosting space that allows dns aliasing contact us to help out! Some Maps Provided by:
Great thanks to all who donated and everyone who uses the site as well. Site designed for 800x600+ resolution
When in doubt, take the word of the National Hurricane Center