Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,164

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A North American Hourly Assimilation and Model Forecast Cycle: The Rapid Refresh

Benjamin, Stanley G., Weygandt, Stephen S., Brown, John M., Hu, Ming, Alexander, Curtis R., Smirnova, Tatiana G., Olson, Joseph B., James, Eric P., Dowell, David C., Grell, Georg A., Lin, Haidao, Peckham, Steven E., Smith, Tracy Lorraine, Moninger, William R., Kenyon, Jaymes S., Manikin, Geoffrey S.·2016·Monthly Weather Review

Abstract

The Rapid Refresh (RAP), an hourly updated assimilation and model forecast system, replaced the Rapid Update Cycle (RUC) as an operational regional analysis and forecast system among the suite of models at the NOAA/National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) in 2012. The need for an effective hourly updated assimilation and modeling system for the United States for situational awareness and related decision-making has continued to increase for various applications including aviation (and transportation in general), severe weather, and energy. The RAP is distinct from the previous RUC in three primary aspects: a larger geographical domain (covering North America), use of the community-based Advanced Research version of the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) Model (ARW) replacing the RUC forecast model, and use of the Gridpoint Statistical Interpolation analysis system (GSI) instead of the RUC three-dimensional variational data assimilation (3DVar). As part of the RAP development, modifications have been made to the community ARW model (especially in model physics) and GSI assimilation systems, some based on previous model and assimilation design innovations developed initially with the RUC. Upper-air comparison is included for forecast verification against both rawinsondes and aircraft reports, the latter allowing hourly verification. In general, the RAP produces superior forecasts to those from the RUC, and its skill has continued to increase from 2012 up to RAP version 3 as of 2015. In addition, the RAP can improve on persistence forecasts for the 1–3-h forecast range for surface, upper-air, and ceiling forecasts.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1175/mwr-d-15-0242.1

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 1,164

Metadata

Authors
Benjamin, S. G., Weygandt, S. S., Brown, J. M., Hu, M., Alexander, C. R., Smirnova, T. G., Olson, J. B., James, E. P., Dowell, D. C., Grell, G. A., Lin, H., Peckham, S. E., Smith, T. L., Moninger, W. R., Kenyon, J. S., & Manikin, G. S.
Venue
Monthly Weather Review
Published
2016-04
Volume
144
Issue
4
Pages
1669-1694
ISSN
  • 0027-0644 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-0493
OpenAlex
W2259421489
Cited by
1,164
References
0
FWCI
36.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A North American Hourly Assimilation and Model Forecast Cycle: The Rapid Refresh. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1175/mwr-d-15-0242.1
The paper
Benjamin, S. G., Weygandt, S. S., Brown, J. M., Hu, M., Alexander, C. R., Smirnova, T. G., Olson, J. B., James, E. P., Dowell, D. C., Grell, G. A., Lin, H., Peckham, S. E., Smith, T. L., Moninger, W. R., Kenyon, J. S., & Manikin, G. S. (2016). A North American Hourly Assimilation and Model Forecast Cycle: The Rapid Refresh. Monthly Weather Review. https://doi.org/10.1175/mwr-d-15-0242.1

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.