Experimental Forecast with the latest Version of the LDEO Model
contributed by Dake Chen, Stephen E. Zebiak, and Mark
A. Cane
Lamont-Doherty
Earth Observatory of
For more than
a decade, the LDEO model (Cane et al., 1986; Zebiak and Cane, 1987) has played an
important role in our understanding and prediction of ENSO. However, the
predictive skill of the original Lamont model (LDEO1) is severely limited by
its unbalanced initialization scheme, its sole dependence on wind data and its
large systematic biases. In the last few years, we have made considerable
improvements in model initialization, data assimilation, and bias correction,
resulting in LDEO2, LDEO3 and LDEO4 (Chen et al., 1995, 1998, 1999, 2000). Most
recently, we have further improved the model by introducing a statistical
correction term in the model SST equation (Chen et al., 2004). It is now more
straightforward to assimilate data for model initialization because of much
reduced model-data incompatibility. The new version of the model not only performs
better in retrospective forecasting, but also exhibits a more realistic
internal variability.
Here we
present the current forecasts of the latest version of the LDEO model (LDEO5). Figure 1 shows model predicted SST and wind stress
anomalies in the tropical Pacific for the next three seasons. These are
ensemble averages of the forecasts started from the last three months, with
observed monthly SST, wind and sea level data assimilated. Three sets of
forecasts were made in the middle of each month with three different kinds of
wind stress data (QuikScat, NCEP and FSU) for initialization. CAC SST and TOPEX
sea level data were used in all three cases. Thus the ensembles shown in Figure 1 are based on 9 individual forecasts. A closer look
at the forecast integrations for NINO3 is provided in Figure
2, which shows individual 9 month forecasts beginning from 1-month-apart
initial conditions in the last two years. Note that the FSU winds are from the
new objective analysis.
The LDEO
model is predicting near-normal conditions for the coming summer, followed by
moderate warming in the central and eastern equatorial pacific for the next two
seasons.
References:
Cane, M. A., S. E. Zebiak and S. C.
Dolan, 1986: Experimental forecasts of El Nino, Nature, 321, 827-832.
Chen, D., S. E. Zebiak, A. J. Busalacchi
and M. A. Cane, 1995: An improved procedure for El Nino forecasting:
implications for predictability. Science,
269, 1699-1702.
Chen, D., M. A. Cane, and S. E. Zebiak,
1998: The impact of sea level data assimilation on the Lamont model prediction
of the 1997/98 El Nino, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 25, 2837-2840.
Chen, D., M. A. Cane, and S. E. Zebiak,
1999: The impact of NSCAT winds on predicting the 1997/98 El Nino: A case study
with the Lamont model. J. Geophys. Res.,
104, 11321-11327.
Chen, D., M. A. Cane, S. E. Zebiak,
Rafael Canizares and A. Kaplan, 2000, Bias correction of an ocean-atmosphere
coupled model, Geophys. Res. Lett., 27, 2585-2588.
Chen, D., M. A. Cane, A. Kaplan, S. E.
Zebiak and D. Huang, 2004: Predictability of El Nino in the past 148 years, Nature, 428, 733-736.
Zebiak, S. E. and M. A. Cane, 1987: A
model El Nino-Southern Oscillation. Mon.
Wea. Rev., 115, 2262-2278.