{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02860858257477243, 'fraction_numerical': 0.015604681404421327, 'mean_word_length': 5.180722891566265, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Evaluation of Forecast Performance for Four Meteorological Models in Summer Over Northwestern China

At present, numerical models, which have been used for forecasting services in northwestern China, have not been extensively evaluated. We used national automatic ground station data from summer 2016 to test and assess the forecast performance of the high-resolution global European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecast (ECMWF) model, the mesoscale Northwestern Mesoscale Numerical Prediction System (NW-MNPS), the global China Meteorological Administration T639 model, and the mesoscale Global/Regional Assimilation and Prediction System (GRAPES) model over northwestern China. The root mean square error (RMSE) of the 2-m temperature forecast by ECMWF was the lowest, while that by T639 was the highest. The distribution of RMSE for each model forecast was similar to that of the difference between the modeled and observed terrain. The RMSE of the 10-m wind speed forecast was lower for the global ECMWF and T639 models and higher for the regional NW-MNPS and GRAPES models. The 24-h precipitation forecast was generally higher than observed for each model, with NW-MNPS having the highest score for light rain and heavy storm rain, ECMWF for medium and heavy rain, and T639 for storm rain. None of the models could forecast small-scale and high-intensity precipitation, but they could forecast large-scale precipitation. Overall, ECMWF had the best stability and smallest prediction errors, followed by NW-MNPS, T639, and GRAPES.