ACPD Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Discussions ACPD 1680-7375 Copernicus GmbH Göttingen, Germany 10.5194/acpd-11-31769-2011 Some issues in uncertainty quantification and parameter tuning: a case study of convective parameterization scheme in the WRF regional climate model Yang B. 1 2 Qian Y. 1 Lin G. 1 Leung R. 1 Zhang Y. 2 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington, USA School of Atmospheric Sciences, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China 02 12 2011 11 12 31769 31817 This is an open-access article ditributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. This article is available from http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/11/31769/2011/acpd-11-31769-2011.html The full text article is available as a PDF file from http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/11/31769/2011/acpd-11-31769-2011.pdf

The current tuning process of parameters in global climate models is often performed subjectively or treated as an optimization procedure to minimize model biases based on observations. While the latter approach may provide more plausible values for a set of tunable parameters to approximate the observed climate, the system could be forced to an unrealistic physical state or improper balance of budgets through compensating errors over different regions of the globe. In this study, the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model was used to provide a more flexible framework to investigate a number of issues related uncertainty quantification (UQ) and parameter tuning. The WRF model was constrained by reanalysis of data over the Southern Great Plains (SGP), where abundant observational data from various sources was available for calibration of the input parameters and validation of the model results. Focusing on five key input parameters in the new Kain-Fritsch (KF) convective parameterization scheme used in WRF as an example, the purpose of this study was to explore the utility of high-resolution observations for improving simulations of regional patterns and evaluate the transferability of UQ and parameter tuning across physical processes, spatial scales, and climatic regimes, which have important implications to UQ and parameter tuning in global and regional models. A stochastic important-sampling algorithm, Multiple Very Fast Simulated Annealing (MVFSA) was employed to efficiently sample the input parameters in the KF scheme based on a skill score so that the algorithm progressively moved toward regions of the parameter space that minimize model errors. <br><br> The results based on the WRF simulations with 25-km grid spacing over the SGP showed that the precipitation bias in the model could be significantly reduced when five optimal parameters identified by the MVFSA algorithm were used. The model performance was found to be sensitive to downdraft- and entrainment-related parameters and consumption time of Convective Available Potential Energy (CAPE). Simulated convective precipitation decreased as the ratio of downdraft to updraft flux increased. Larger CAPE consumption time resulted in less convective but more stratiform precipitation. The simulation using optimal parameters obtained by constraining only precipitation generated positive impact on the other output variables, such as temperature and wind. By using the optimal parameters obtained at 25-km simulation, both the magnitude and spatial pattern of simulated precipitation were improved at 12-km spatial resolution. The optimal parameters identified from the SGP region also improved the simulation of precipitation when the model domain was moved to another region with a different climate regime (i.e., the North America monsoon region). These results suggest that benefits of optimal parameters determined through vigorous mathematical procedures such as the MVFSA process are transferable across processes, spatial scales, and climatic regimes to some extent. This motivates future studies to further assess the strategies for UQ and parameter optimization at both global and regional scales.

 References Allen,~M R., Stott,~P A., Mitchell,~J F B., Schnur,~R., and Delworth,~T L.: Quantifying the uncertainty in forecasts of anthropogenic climate change, Nature, 407, 617–620, 2000. % Arakawa,~A., Jung, J.-H., and Wu, C.-M.: Toward unification of the multiscale modeling of the % atmosphere, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 3731–3742, http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-11–3731-2011doi:10.5194/acp-11–3731-2011, 2011. ### % SELF-REFERENCE ### Arakawa,~A., Jung,~J.-H., and Wu,~C.-M.: Toward unification of the multiscale modeling of the atmosphere, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 3731–3742, http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-3731-2011doi:10.5194/acp-11-3731-2011, 2011. Barker,~H W., Pincus,~R., and Morcrette,~J.-J.: The Monte-Carlo Independent Column Approximation: Application within large-scale models. Proceedings of the GCSS/ARM Workshop on the Representation of Cloud Systems in Large-Scale Models, May 2002, Kananaskis, Alberta, Canada, 10~pp., 2003. Bechtold,~P., Bazile,~E., Guichard,~F., Mascart,~P., and Richard,~E.: A mass-flux convection scheme for regional and global models, Q J R. Meteorol. Soc., 127, 869–886, 2001. Berbery,~E H.: Mesoscale moisture analysis of the North American monsoon,~J. Climate, 14, 121–137, 2001. Boyle,~J S., Williamson,~D., Cederwall,~R., Fiorino,~M., Hnilo,~J., Olson,~J., Phillips,~T., Potter,~G., and Xie,~S.: Diagnosis of Community Atmospheric Model 2 (CAM2) in numerical weather forecast configuration at Atmospheric Radiation Measurement sites, J. Geophys. Res., 110, D15S15, http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2004JD005042doi:10.1029/2004JD005042, 2005. Chen,~F. and Dudhia,~J.: Coupling an advanced land surface-hydrology model with the Penn State-NCAR MM5 modeling system. Part I: Model implementation and sensitivity, Mon. Weather Rev., 129, 569–585, 2001. Cheng,~M D.: Effects of downdrafts and mesoscale convective organization on the heat and moisture budgets of tropical cloud clusters. Part II: Effects of convective-scale downdrafts, J. Atmos. Sci., 46, 1540–1564, 1989. Collins,~W D., Rasch,~P J., Boville,~B A., Hack,~J J., McCaa,~J R., Williamson,~D L., Kiehl,~J T., and Briegleb,~B.: Description of the NCAR Community Atmosphere Model (CAM 3.0), NCAR Technical Note, NCAR/TN-464+STR, 226~pp, 2004. Collins,~M., Booth,~B B., Bhaskaran,~B., Harris,~G R., Murphy,~J M., Sexton,~D M H., and Webb,~M J.: Climate model errors, feedbacks and forcings: a comparison of perturbed physics and multi-model ensembles, Clim. Dynam., 36, 1737–1766, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00382-010-0808-0doi:10.1007/s00382-010-0808-0, 2011. Colman,~R.: A comparison of climate feedbacks in general circulation models, Clim. Dynam., 20, 865–873, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00382-003-0310-zdoi:10.1007/s00382-003-0310-z, 2003. Covey,~C., Brandon,~S., Bremer,~P.-T., Domyancic,~D., Garaizar,~X., Johannesson,~G., Klein,~R., Klein,~S A., Lucas,~D D., Tannahill,~J., and Zhang,~Y.: Quantifying the uncertainties of climate prediction, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., submitted, 2011. Emanuel,~K A. and Zivkovic-Rothman,~M.: Development and evaluation of a convective scheme for use in climate models, J. Atmos. Sci., 56, 1766–1782, 1999. Englehart,~P J. and Douglas,~A V.: Defining intraseasonal rainfall variability within the North American monsoon,~J. Climate, 19, 4243–4253, 2006. Ferrier,~B S., Simpson,~J., and Tao,~W K.: Factors responsible for precipitation efficiencies in midlatitude and tropical squall simulations, Mon. Weather Rev., 124, 2100–2125, 1996. Gilmore,~M S., Straka,~J M., and Rasmussen,~E N.: Precipitation uncertainty due to variations in precipitation particle parameters within a simple microphysics scheme, Mon. Weather Rev., 132, 2610–2627, 2004. Giorgi,~F. and Mearns,~L O.: Calculation of average, uncertainty range, and reliability of regional climate changes from AOGCM simulations via the \qutreliability ensemble averaging (REA) method, J. Climate, 15, 1141–1158, 2002. Grant,~A L M.: Cloud-base fluxes in the cumulus-capped boundary layer, Q J R. Meteorol. Soc., 127, 407–421, 2001. Gregory,~D., Morcrette,~J J., Jakob,~C., Beljaars,~A C M., and Stockdale,~T.: Revision of convection, radiation and cloud schemes in the ECMWF Integrated Forecasting System, Q J R. Meteorol. Soc., 126, 1685–1710, 2000. Grell,~G A. and Devenyi,~D.: A generalized approach to parameterizing convection combining ensemble and data assimilation techniques, Geophys. Res. Lett., 29, 1693, http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2002GL015311doi:10.1029/2002GL015311, 2002. Haario,~H., Saksman,~E., and Tamminen,~J.: An adaptive Metropolis algorithm, Bernoulli, 7, 223–242, 2001. Hawkins,~E. and Sutton,~R.: The potential to narrow uncertainty in regional climate predictions, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 90, 1095–1107, http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/2009BAMS2607.1doi:10.1175/2009BAMS2607.1, 2009. Hong, S.-Y. and Lim, J.-O J.: The WRF Single-Moment 6-Class Microphysics Scheme (WSM6), J. Korean Meteor. Soc., 42, 129–151, 2006. Hurrell,~J., Meehl,~G., Bader,~D., Delworth,~T., Kirtman,~B., and Wielicki,~B.: A unified modeling approach to climate system prediction, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 90, 1819–1832, http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/2009BAMS2752.1doi:10.1175/2009BAMS2752.1, 2009. Ingber,~L.: Very fast simulated re-annealing, Math. Comput. Model., 12, 967–973, 1989. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Solomon, S., Qin, D., Manning, M., Chen, Z., Marquis, M., Averyt, K. B., Tignor, M., and Miller, H. L., Manning,~M., Marquis,~M., Averyt,~K., Tignor,~M., Miller,~H L., and Chen,~Z., Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2007. Jackson,~C., Xia,~Y., Sen,~M K., and Stoffa,~P L.: Optimal parameter and uncertainty estimation of a land surface model: A case study using data from Cabauw, Netherlands, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 4583, http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2002jd002991doi:10.1029/2002jd002991, 2003. Jackson,~C., Sen,~M K., and Stoffa,~P L.: An efficient stochastic Bayesian approach to optimal parameter and uncertainty estimation for climate model predictions, J. Climate, 17, 2828–2841, 2004. Jackson,~C S., Sen,~M K., Huerta,~G., Deng,~Y., and Bowman,~K P.: Error Reduction and Convergence in Climate Prediction, J. Climate, 21, 6698–6709, http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/2008jcli2112.1doi:10.1175/2008jcli2112.1, 2008. Janjic,~Z I.: The step-mountain eta coordinate model – further developments of the convection, viscous sublayer, and turbulence closure schemes, Mon. Weather Rev., 122, 927–945, 1994. Janjic,~Z I.: Nonsingular Implementation of the Mellor–Yamada Level 2.5 Scheme in the NCEP Meso model, NCEP Office Note, No 437, 61~pp., 2002. Johnson,~R H.: The role of convective-scale precipitation downdrafts in cumulus and synoptic-scale interactions, J. Atmos. Sci., 33, 1890–1910, 1976. Kain,~J S.: The Kain-Fritsch convective parameterization: an update, J Appl. Meteorol., 43, 170–181, 2004. Kain,~J S. and Fritsch,~J M.: A one-dimensional entraining detraining plume model and its application in convective parameterization, J. Atmos. Sci., 47, 2784–2802, 1990. Kain,~J S. and Fritsch,~J M.: Convective parameterization for mesoscale models: The Kain-Fritcsh scheme, The representation of cumulus convection in numerical models,edited by: Emanuel,~K A. and Raymond,~D J., Am. Meteorol. Soc., Boston, USA, 246~pp., 1993. Kain,~J S., Baldwin,~M E., Janish,~P R., and Weiss,~S J.: Utilizing the Eta model with two different convective parameterizations to predict convective initiation and evolution at the SP~C. Preprints, Ninth Conference on Mesoscale Processes, Ft Lauderdale, FL, 91–95, 2001. Khairoutdinov,~M F. and Randall,~D A.: A cloud resolving model as a cloud parameterization in the NCAR Community Climate System Model: preliminary results, Geophys. Res. Lett., 28, 3617–3620, 2001. Kirkpatrick,~S., Gelatt,~C D., and Vecchi,~M P.: Optimization by simulated annealing, Science, 220, 671–680, 1983. Knupp,~K R. and Cotton,~W R.: Convective cloud downdraft structure – an interpretive survey, Rev. Geophys., 23, 183–215, 1985. Kreitzberg,~C W. and Perkey,~D J.: Release of Potential Instability. 1 Sequential plume model within a hydrostatic primitive equation model,~J. Atmos. Sci., 33, 456–475, 1976. Liang,~F.: Annealing evolutionary stochastic approximation Monte Carlo for global optimization, Stat. Comput., 21, 375–393, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11222-010-9176-1doi:10.1007/s11222-010-9176-1, 2010. Liang,~X.-Z., Li,~L., Dai,~A., and Kunkel,~K E.: Regional climate model simulation of summer precipitation diurnal cycle over the United States, Geophys. Res. Lett., 31, L24208, http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2004GL021054doi:10.1029/2004GL021054, 2004. Liu,~C H., Moncrieff,~M W., and Grabowski,~W W.: Explicit and parameterized realizations of convective cloud systems in TOGA COARE, Mon. Weather Rev., 129, 1689–1703, 2001. Lopez,~A., Tebaldi,~C., New,~M., Stainforth,~D., Allen,~M., and Kettleborough,~J.: Two approaches to quantifying uncertainty in global temperature changes, J. Climate, 19, 4785–4796, 2006. Maurer,~E P., Wood,~A W., Adam,~J C., Lettenmaier,~D P., and Nijssen,~B.: A long-term hydrologically based dataset of land surface fluxes and states for the conterminous United States, J. Climate, 15, 3237–3251, 2002. Medeiros,~B. and Stevens,~B.: Revealing differences in GCM representations of low clouds, Clim. Dynam., 36, 385–399, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00382-009-0694-5doi:10.1007/s00382-009-0694-5, 2011. Metropolis,~N., Rosenbluth,~A W., Rosenbluth,~M N., Teller,~A H., and Teller,~E.: Equation of state calculations by fast computing machines, J. Chem. Phys., 21, 1087–1092, 1953. Min,~S K., Simonis,~D., and Hense,~A.: Probabilistic climate change predictions applying Bayesian model averaging, Philos. T. Roy. Soc. A, 365, 2103–2116, http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2007.2070doi:10.1098/rsta.2007.2070, 2007. Molders,~N.: Plant- and soil-parameter-caused uncertainty of predicted surface fluxes, Mon. Weather Rev., 133, 3498–3516, 2005. Morrison,~H., Curry,~J A., and Khvorostyanov,~V I.: A new double-moment microphysics parameterization for application in cloud and climate models. Part I: Description, J. Atmos. Sci., 62, 1665–1677, 2005. Murphy,~J M., Sexton,~D M H., Barnett,~D N., Jones,~G S., Webb,~M J., and Collins,~M.: Quantification of modelling uncertainties in a large ensemble of climate change simulations, Nature, 430, 768–772, http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature02771doi:10.1038/nature02771, 2004. Murphy,~J M., Booth,~B B B., Collins,~M., Harris,~G R., Sexton,~D M H., and Webb,~M J.: A methodology for probabilistic predictions of regional climate change from perturbed physics ensembles, Philos. T. Roy Soc. A, 365, 1993–2028, http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2007.2077doi:10.1098/rsta.2007.2077, 2007. Moskowitz,~B. and Caflisch,~R E.: Smoothness and dimension reduction in quasi-Monte Carlo methods, Math Comput. Model, 23, 37–54, 1996. Pincus,~R., Barker,~H W., and Morcrette,~J J.: A fast, flexible, approximate technique for computing radiative transfer in inhomogeneous cloud fields,~J. Geophys. Res., 108, 4376, http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2002JD003322doi:10.1029/2002JD003322, 2003. Sen,~M K. and Stoffa,~P L.: Bayesian inference, Gibbs' sampler and uncertainty estimation in geophysical inversion, Geophys. Prospect. 44, 313–350, 1996. Shepherd,~J M., Ferrier,~B S., and Ray,~P S.: Rainfall morphology in Florida convergence zones: A numerical study, Mon. Weather Rev., 129, 177–197, 2001. Simpson,~J., and Wiggert,~V.: Models of precipitating cumulus towers, Mon. Weather Rev., 97, 471–489, 1969. Skamarock,~W C., Klemp,~J B., and Dudhia,~J.: Prototypes for the WRF (Weather Research and Forecasting) model. Preprints, Ninth Conference on Mesoscale Processes, Am. Meteorol. Soc., Ft Lauderdale, FL, J11–J15, 2001. Skamarock,~W C., Klemp,~J B., Dudhia,~J., Gill,~D O., Barker,~D M., Duda,~M G., Huang, X.-Y., Wang,~W., and Powers,~J G.: A Description of the Advanced Research WRF Version 3, NCAR Technical Note, NCAR/TN-475+STR, 123 pp., 2008. Stainforth,~D A., Aina,~T., Christensen,~C., Collins,~M., Faull,~N., Frame,~D J., Kettleborough,~J A., Knight,~S., Martin,~A., Murphy,~J M., Piani,~C., Sexton,~D., Smith,~L A., Spicer,~R A., Thorpe,~A J., and Allen,~M R.: Uncertainty in predictions of the climate response to rising levels of greenhouse gases, Nature, 433, 403–406, http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature03301doi:10.1038/nature03301, 2005. Stein, M.: Large Sample Properties of Simulations Using Latin Hypercube Sampling, Technometrics, 29, 143–151, 1987. Tao,~W K., Chern,~J D., Atlas,~R., Randall,~D., Khairoutdinov,~M., Li,~J L., Waliser,~D E., Hou,~A., Lin,~X., Peters-Lidard,~C., Lau,~W., Jiang,~J., and Simpson,~J.: A multiscale modeling system developments, applications, and critical issues, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 90, 515, http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/2008bams2542.1doi:10.1175/2008bams2542.1, 2009. Taylor,~K E.: Summarizing multiple aspects of model performance in single diagram,~J. Geophys. Res., 106, D7, 7183–7192, http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2000JD900719doi:10.1029/2000JD900719, 2001. Tebaldi,~C., Smith,~R L., Nychka,~D., and Mearns,~L O.: Quantifying uncertainty in projections of regional climate change: A Bayesian approach to the analysis of multimodel ensembles,~J. Climate, 18, 1524–1540, 2005. Tierney,~L. and Mira,~A.: Some adaptive Monte Carlo methods for Bayesian inference, Stat. Med., 18, 2507–2515, 1999. Villagran,~A., Huerta,~G., Jackson,~C S., and Sen,~M K.: Computational Methods for Parameter Estimation in Climate Models, Bayesian Anal., 3, 823–850, http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/08-BA331doi:10.1214/08-BA331, 2008. Warner,~T T. and Hsu,~H M.: Nested-model simulation of moist convection: The impact of coarse-grid parameterized convection on fine-grid resolved convection, Mon. Weather Rev., 128, 2211–2231, 2000. Webb,~M J., Senior,~C A., Sexton,~D M H., Ingram,~W J., Williams,~K D., Ringer,~M A., McAvaney,~B J., Colman,~R., Soden,~B J., Gudgel,~R., Knutson,~T., Emori,~S., Ogura,~T., Tsushima,~Y., Andronova,~N., Li,~B., Musat,~I., Bony,~S., and Taylor,~K E.: On the contribution of local feedback mechanisms to the range of climate sensitivity in two GCM ensembles, Clim. Dynam., 27, 17–38, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00382-006-0111-2doi:10.1007/s00382-006-0111-2, 2006. Zhang,~G J. and McFarlane,~N A.: Sensitivity of Climate Simulations to the parameterization of cumulus convection in the canadian climate center general-circulation model, Atmos. Ocean, 33, 407–446, 1995.