A comparative verification of forecasts from two operational solar wind models
Author(s) -
Norquist Donald C.,
Meeks Warner C.
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
space weather
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.254
H-Index - 56
ISSN - 1542-7390
DOI - 10.1029/2010sw000598
Subject(s) - meteorology , standard deviation , environmental science , solar wind , space weather , climatology , statistics , physics , mathematics , geology , quantum mechanics , magnetic field
The solar wind (SW) and interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) have a significant influence on the near‐Earth space environment. In this study we evaluate and compare forecasts from two models that predict SW and IMF conditions: the Hakamada‐Akasofu‐Fry (HAF) version 2, operational at the Air Force Weather Agency, and Wang‐Sheeley‐Arge (WSA) version 1.6, executed routinely at the Space Weather Prediction Center. SW speed (V sw ) and IMF polarity (B pol ) forecasts at L1 were compared with Wind and Advanced Composition Explorer satellite observations. Verification statistics were computed by study year and forecast day. Results revealed that both models' mean V sw are slower than observed. The HAF slow bias increases with forecast duration. WSA had lower V sw forecast‐observation difference (F‐O) absolute means and standard deviations than HAF. HAF and WSA V sw forecast standard deviations were less than observed. V sw F‐O mean square skill rarely exceeds that of recurrence forecasts. B pol is correctly predicted 65%–85% of the time in both models. Recurrence beats the models in B pol skill in nearly every year forecast day category. Verification by “event” (flare events ≤5 days before forecast start) and “nonevent” (no flares) forecasts showed that most HAF V sw bias growth, F‐O standard deviation decrease, and forecast standard deviation decrease were due to the event forecasts. Analysis of single time step V sw increases of ≥20% in the nonevent forecasts indicated that both models predicted too many occurrences and missed many observed incidences. Neither model had skill above a random guess in predicting V sw increase arrival time at L1.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom