4.6 Article

Regional Arctic sea-ice prediction: potential versus operational seasonal forecast skill

期刊

CLIMATE DYNAMICS
卷 52, 期 5-6, 页码 2721-2743

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00382-018-4288-y

关键词

Sea ice; Seasonal predictability; Arctic

资金

  1. NOAA's Climate Program Office, Climate Variability and Predictability Program [GC15-504]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Seasonal predictions of Arctic sea ice on regional spatial scales are a pressing need for a broad group of stakeholders, however, most assessments of predictability and forecast skill to date have focused on pan-Arctic sea-ice extent (SIE). In this work, we present the first direct comparison of perfect model (PM) and operational (OP) seasonal prediction skill for regional Arctic SIE within a common dynamical prediction system. This assessment is based on two complementary suites of seasonal prediction ensemble experiments performed with a global coupled climate model. First, we present a suite of PM predictability experiments with start dates spanning the calendar year, which are used to quantify the potential regional SIE prediction skill of this system. Second, we assess the system's OP prediction skill for detrended regional SIE using a suite of retrospective initialized seasonal forecasts spanning 1981-2016. In nearly all Arctic regions and for all target months, we find a substantial skill gap between PM and OP predictions of regional SIE. The PM experiments reveal that regional winter SIE is potentially predictable at lead times beyond 12 months, substantially longer than the skill of their OP counterparts. Both the OP and PM predictions display a spring prediction skill barrier for regional summer SIE forecasts, indicating a fundamental predictability limit for summer regional predictions. We find that a similar barrier exists for pan-Arctic sea-ice volume predictions, but is not present for predictions of pan-Arctic SIE. The skill gap identified in this work indicates a promising potential for future improvements in regional SIE predictions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据