// 改行を反映するか #setlinebreak(off) **RCM2009 [#obe1ae44] Plan to participate RCM2009 http://www.baltex-research.eu/RCM2009/ for 4-8 May. 9:00 Prof Per Eriksson (Lund University) - Lund U was founded in 1666. 9:10 Bengt Holgersson (Swedish government commission on climate and vulnerability) 9:20 Rupa Kumar Kolli (WMO) Session1 (chaired by Burkhardt Rockel) 9:30 Frauke Feser (GKSS): Added value by RCM - 女性でした。 - Winterfeldt and Weisse, MWR 2009 - only coastal region, we can see added value. Not open ocean. - Spatial resolution threshold for added value? - double nesting is necessary for typhoon simulation 9:50 Rene Laprise (UQAM) - 男性でした。 - internal variability increases as domain size enlarges - inperfect big-brother: checking whether RCM can improve LS. - remaining issues: -- spatial spin-up (200x200: 50km) 10:15 Katarina Veljovic (Univ. Belgrade) - Storm track: ECMWF is better than RCMs! 11:00 Myself - Reason of overestimation of precipitation (or signs of error)? (A. Will) -- Due to spurious divergence. - Extrapolation to stratosphere (R. Laprise) -- better than simple way. (but no information at all) 11:20 H.S. Kang (Yonsei) - NCEP RSM - Internal variability? - Sensitivity of Parameterizations 11:40 J. Tang (Nanjing U) - MM5 (nonhydro, KF2) Spectral nudging, 50km - 1991 Summer in China (flood) - Someone is sticking to ask about climate simulation downscaling. - By Hans; The difference in observation and RCM simulation: is this error from the model or something else? 12:00 K. Dairaku - Slight change in precipitation makes significant impact in river discharge. 12:20 Martin Suklitsch (U. Graz) - NHCM-1, 10km - COSMO-CLM ver4.0 - Alps up to 1km - added value -- no in bias and diurnal pattern -- some in pattern - effective resolution: 3-5*dx. 14:00 Kanamitsu (Yoshimura) - No comment :( 14:20 Rosmeri da Rocha 14:45 A. Alexandru (Canada) - 女性でした - SN reduces IV. - ちょっと効きすぎ?? Their "full nudging" is 100% replacing of waves! - ちょっと効きすぎ?? Their "full nudging" is 100% replacing of waves! 15:05 M. Zahn (GKSS)--> Very nice. - Polar lows - detection algorithm -- filtered mslp < -1 hPa - strong IV. 17:00 A. Gobiet (Wegener Center)--> comprehensive. - 10km downscaling from ERA40 -> 4 models, 57 runs. - 15% error from models, set-up (incl. nudging, domain) - 50% error from parameterization (mostly from WRF) 17:25 Christopher Castro (U. AZ) - Dynamical downscaling types -- IC are forgotten -> type 2 and above - Castro 2005 + spectral nudging - Q: short period -> robust for long period, probably. - Q: conservation (?) 17:50 Martin Leduc (Canada) - Little/Big brother experiments - transient eddies - spectral nudging -- Full SN: completely replacing waves -> why possible? 18:10 Erasmo Buonomo (Met Office) - scale separation -- 2D digital filter (Feser and von Storch, 2005) - Discrete cosine transform (DCT) filter Denis et al., 2002 18:30 Discussion - What evidence do we need to declare a model "wrong"? - What is the utility of case studies? - What added value are "we" after? - For what purpose do we need higher resolution? - What is the utility of applying large scale constraints? - How do we determine the utility of large-scale constrained GCM-driven RCM simulations? 総括: - German vs Canadianですねー。Scrippsは人手が足らん。 - Spectral nudging 大流行。 #setlinebreak(default) CENTER: RIGHT: &size(10){category:[[Meeting>:config/plugin/calendar/_category/Meeting]] author: ''kei'' at 2009-03-09 (Mon) 07:55:33}; //-- comment -- ---- - Spectral nudgingって,波長の長い成分だけGCMの結果にナッジングする感じですか? それだと側面境界を与える(というか事実上境界付近だけ全成分GCMにナッジングする) より意味が明確かも.しかし空間差分を使ったモデルだと実装が難しい気がします. -- [[Souma at Hawaii]] &new{2009-05-10 (Sun) 17:44:52}; - コメントに今気づいた。すまんね。そう、空間的に波長の長い成分のナッジング。グリッドモデルでも波数展開して実装している模様(CRCM、WRFとか)。ただ、彼らは側方境界も残したままやってるっぽい。 -- [[kei]] &new{2009-05-12 (Tue) 09:07:58}; - おいそがしいところお相手いただきありがとうございます.やっぱりNCARとか「プログラミングが専門だけれどサイエンス(気象・気候)も一通りわかる人」と「バリバリ研究者で新しいスキームの概念を作るとかしたいけど,実装の仕方もある程度はしっている」タイプの人達がいて,チームを組んで取り組めるんでしょうね.分担と協力をしっかりマネジメントできれば,WRFとか巨大なシステムを生み出し,改良していくことができるんでしょうね. -- &new{2009-05-14 (Thu) 07:16:49}; #comment2_kcaptcha