the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Statistical calibration of probabilistic medium-range fire weather index forecasts in Europe
Abstract. Wildfires are increasing in frequency and severity across Europe, which makes accurate wildfire risk estimation crucial. Wildfire risk is usually estimated using meteorological based fire weather indices such as the Canadian Forest Fire Weather Index (FWI). By using weather forecasts, the FWI can be predicted for several days and even weeks ahead. Probabilistic ensemble forecasts require verification and post-processing in order to provide reliable and accurate forecasts, which are crucial for informed decision making and an effective emergency response. In this study, we investigate the potential of non-homogeneous Gaussian regression (NGR) for statistically post-processing ensemble forecasts of the Canadian Forest Fire Weather Index. The FWI is calculated using medium range ensemble forecasts from the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) with lead times up to 15 days over Europe. The method is tested using a 30 day rolling training period and dividing the European region into three training areas (Northern, Central and Mediterranean Europe). The calibration improves FWI forecast particularly at shorter lead times and in regions with elevated FWI values i.e. areas with a higher wildfire risk.
- Preprint
(2457 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(5698 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on nhess-2024-57', Anonymous Referee #1, 10 Jun 2024
The paper is interesting, and I personally think it meets the overall criteria for publication. However, I had a number of doubts while reading it, which I -hopefully- wrote down clearly in the “Major Comments” section of the attached file, which I consider essential to address before closing the review process. Some other formalities also have to be fixed, especially in the first two paragraphs.
I hope you find my comments stimulating.
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Stephanie Bohlmann, 23 Aug 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://nhess.copernicus.org/preprints/nhess-2024-57/nhess-2024-57-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Stephanie Bohlmann, 23 Aug 2024
-
RC2: 'Comment on nhess-2024-57', Anonymous Referee #2, 13 Jun 2024
The study “statistical calibration of probabilistic medium-range fire weather index forecasts in Europe” of Bohlmann and Leine shows how the Fire Weather Index (FWI) can be calibrated in medium-range weather forecasts to improve FWI in weather forecast and enhance preparedness of fire-fighting resources during high FWI periods. This topic is scientifically important and suits well into the scope of NHESS.
The authors show that their chosen method, i. e., non-homogenous Gaussian regression (NGR) improves the FWI derived from medium-range weather forecasts at shorter lead times by presenting results of different skill metrics, i.e., RSME, ME and CPRSS. I appreciated that the manuscript is well-written and in general easy to follow. Unfortunately, a clear research question is missing, which makes it hard for the reader to know what to expect from the paper. Further, it is not clear in methods and data section for what post-processing steps which datasets are used. This can be improved by revising the manuscript carefully as outlined in the comments below. The results are presented in a clear structure and the figures are easy to interpret, because of the good metric description in the method section. However, the visualization can be improved by minor adjustments. The discussion section is missing, which is unfortunate as a reflection of the authors on the strengths and weaknesses of their method and achieved results, in comparison to other studies would be very valuable for other researchers in this field.
Before publication, the manuscript needs major revisions. I suggest the authors to revise the manuscript carefully, correct and clarify the methods, data and results section and add a discussion section. You can find my specific comments in the attachment and I am happy to read the revised manuscript again.
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC2', Stephanie Bohlmann, 23 Aug 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://nhess.copernicus.org/preprints/nhess-2024-57/nhess-2024-57-AC3-supplement.pdf
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC2', Stephanie Bohlmann, 23 Aug 2024
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Stephanie Bohlmann, 23 Aug 2024
Publisher’s note: this comment is a copy of AC3 and its content was therefore removed on 26 August 2024.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2024-57-AC2
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on nhess-2024-57', Anonymous Referee #1, 10 Jun 2024
The paper is interesting, and I personally think it meets the overall criteria for publication. However, I had a number of doubts while reading it, which I -hopefully- wrote down clearly in the “Major Comments” section of the attached file, which I consider essential to address before closing the review process. Some other formalities also have to be fixed, especially in the first two paragraphs.
I hope you find my comments stimulating.
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Stephanie Bohlmann, 23 Aug 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://nhess.copernicus.org/preprints/nhess-2024-57/nhess-2024-57-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Stephanie Bohlmann, 23 Aug 2024
-
RC2: 'Comment on nhess-2024-57', Anonymous Referee #2, 13 Jun 2024
The study “statistical calibration of probabilistic medium-range fire weather index forecasts in Europe” of Bohlmann and Leine shows how the Fire Weather Index (FWI) can be calibrated in medium-range weather forecasts to improve FWI in weather forecast and enhance preparedness of fire-fighting resources during high FWI periods. This topic is scientifically important and suits well into the scope of NHESS.
The authors show that their chosen method, i. e., non-homogenous Gaussian regression (NGR) improves the FWI derived from medium-range weather forecasts at shorter lead times by presenting results of different skill metrics, i.e., RSME, ME and CPRSS. I appreciated that the manuscript is well-written and in general easy to follow. Unfortunately, a clear research question is missing, which makes it hard for the reader to know what to expect from the paper. Further, it is not clear in methods and data section for what post-processing steps which datasets are used. This can be improved by revising the manuscript carefully as outlined in the comments below. The results are presented in a clear structure and the figures are easy to interpret, because of the good metric description in the method section. However, the visualization can be improved by minor adjustments. The discussion section is missing, which is unfortunate as a reflection of the authors on the strengths and weaknesses of their method and achieved results, in comparison to other studies would be very valuable for other researchers in this field.
Before publication, the manuscript needs major revisions. I suggest the authors to revise the manuscript carefully, correct and clarify the methods, data and results section and add a discussion section. You can find my specific comments in the attachment and I am happy to read the revised manuscript again.
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC2', Stephanie Bohlmann, 23 Aug 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://nhess.copernicus.org/preprints/nhess-2024-57/nhess-2024-57-AC3-supplement.pdf
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC2', Stephanie Bohlmann, 23 Aug 2024
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Stephanie Bohlmann, 23 Aug 2024
Publisher’s note: this comment is a copy of AC3 and its content was therefore removed on 26 August 2024.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2024-57-AC2
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
319 | 144 | 27 | 490 | 38 | 19 | 21 |
- HTML: 319
- PDF: 144
- XML: 27
- Total: 490
- Supplement: 38
- BibTeX: 19
- EndNote: 21
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1