20.04.2013 Views

Documentation of the Evaluation of CALPUFF and Other Long ...

Documentation of the Evaluation of CALPUFF and Other Long ...

Documentation of the Evaluation of CALPUFF and Other Long ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

(26.8%). SCIPUFF (20 0.6%), HYSPLIT<br />

(15.1%), <strong>and</strong> <strong>CALPUFF</strong>F<br />

(14.1%) wwere<br />

in <strong>the</strong> mmiddle,<br />

<strong>and</strong><br />

CALGRIDD<br />

exhibited th he poorest TTS<br />

performance<br />

with a score<br />

<strong>of</strong> 6.7% %.<br />

Figure C‐ ‐22. Threat Score (TS) statistical<br />

peerformance<br />

mmetric<br />

for thhe<br />

six LRT mmodels<br />

<strong>and</strong><br />

CAPTEX RRelease<br />

3.<br />

Overall spatial<br />

performance<br />

wass<br />

relatively equal<br />

betweeen<br />

FLEXPARTT<br />

<strong>and</strong> CAMx, , with CAMxx<br />

having thhe<br />

best perfo ormance forr<br />

<strong>the</strong> FMS annd<br />

POD statisstics<br />

<strong>and</strong> FLEEXPART<br />

having<br />

better<br />

performaance<br />

in <strong>the</strong> FAR F <strong>and</strong> TS ccategories.<br />

C<strong>CALPUFF</strong>,<br />

SCCIPUFF,<br />

<strong>and</strong> HYSPLIT werre<br />

comparabble<br />

in<br />

<strong>the</strong>ir spatial<br />

perform mance for <strong>the</strong>e<br />

CTEX3 expeeriment,<br />

witth<br />

SCIPUFF sshowing<br />

marrginally<br />

betteer<br />

scores in all <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> fo our spatial peerformance<br />

metrics. CAALGRID<br />

exhibbited<br />

<strong>the</strong> poorest<br />

performaance<br />

across all four spattial<br />

metrics.<br />

C.4.2 GLLOBAL<br />

ANAL LYSIS OF MOODEL<br />

PERFORRMANCE<br />

Eight global<br />

statistica al analysis mmetrics<br />

are ussed<br />

to evaluuate<br />

<strong>the</strong> five LRT model pperformancee<br />

using <strong>the</strong>e<br />

ETEX data base b that are<br />

described in Section 22.4<br />

<strong>and</strong> consiist<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> FOOEX,<br />

FA2, FA55,<br />

NMSE, PCCC,<br />

FB, KS an nd RANK staatistical<br />

metrrics.<br />

Figure C‐ ‐23 displays <strong>the</strong> FOEX peerformance<br />

mmetrics<br />

for t<strong>the</strong><br />

six LRT mmodels.<br />

HYSSPLIT<br />

has <strong>the</strong>e<br />

best FOEEX<br />

score with h a value <strong>of</strong> 22.0%<br />

that is closest to zeero.<br />

The seccond<br />

best peerforming<br />

model<br />

using <strong>the</strong>e<br />

FOEX metric<br />

is CAMx (99.6%)<br />

that iss<br />

followed byy<br />

SCIPUFF (111.5%).<br />

CALGGRID<br />

has <strong>the</strong>e<br />

poorest FFOEX<br />

score with w 20.6%.<br />

26

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!