.bar {font-family:monospace;font-size:12px }
  .verybad  { color:#ff0000 }
  .verygood { color:#008000 }
  .bad      { color:#ff0000 }
  .good     { color:#008000 }
  .neutral  { color:#808080 }
  .boxgood    { font-size:0px; display: inline-block ; width:5px; border:1px solid #77e577 ; overflow:hidden }
  .boxsiggood { font-size:0px; display: inline-block ; width:5px; border:1px solid #389326; background-color: #389326 !important ; overflow:hidden }
  .boxbad     { font-size:0px; display: inline-block ; width:5px; border:1px solid #ff9f9f; overflow:hidden }
  .boxsigbad  { font-size:0px; display: inline-block ; width:5px; border:1px solid #ff0000 ; background-color: #ff0000 !important ; overflow:hidden }
  .boxnone    { font-size:0px; display: inline-block ; width:5px; border:1px solid black; overflow:hidden }

High resolution

Comparison of scores of IFS cycle 41r2 (combination of research experiments and the current e-suite) and IFS cycle 41r1 (the current operational cycle) verified by the respective analyses or radiosonde and SYNOP observations at 00UTC for the period 00 UTC on 1 January 2015 to 12 UTC on 7 February 2016 (637 forecast runs).

Score card provides a quick visual overview over the performance of the CY41r2 scores compared to CY41r1. It is a simplified summary of verify error plots of various domains, scores, parameters etc.
Each error plot is converted into a sequence of symbols (e.g. ▼ ▾ ▾ ░ ░ ░ ░ ▴ ▲ ▲) where each symbol indicates for given time step whether or not the CY41r2 is significantly better or worse than the CY41r1.
Symbol legend: for a given forecast step... (d: score difference, s: confidence interval width)
▲ CY41r2 better than CY41r1 statistically highly significant (the confidence bar above zero by more than its height )(d/s>3)
▴ CY41r2 better than CY41r1 statistically significant (d/s≥1)
░ CY41r2 better than CY41r1, yet not statistically significant (d/s≥0.5)
░ not really any difference between CY41r1 and CY41r2
░ CY41r2 worse than CY41r1, yet not statistically significant (d/s≤-0.5)
▾ CY41r2 worse than CY41r1 statistically significant (d/s≤-1)
▼ CY41r2 worse than CY41r1 statistically highly significant (the confidence bar below zero by more than its height) (d/s<-3)

Extended HRES scorecard

Comparison for additional domains can be found in the extended HRES scorecards

• Extended scorecard for northern and southern hemispheres, tropics and Europe
• Extended scorecard for north Atlantic, north America and north Pacific
• Extended scorecard for east Asia, Australia and New Zealand, the Arctic and Antarctic

Ensemble

Comparison of scores of IFS cycle 41r2 (current e-suite) and IFS cycle 41r1 (the current operational cycle) verified by the respective analyses or SYNOP observations at 00UTC for the period 00 UTC on 10 August 2015 to 12 UTC on 7 February 2016 (247 forecast runs).

Score card provides a quick visual overview over the performance of the CY41r2 scores compared to CY41r1. It is a simplified summary of verify error plots of various domains, scores, parameters etc.
Each error plot is converted into a sequence of symbols (e.g. ▼ ▾ ▾ ░ ░ ░ ░ ▴ ▲ ▲) where each symbol indicates for given time step whether or not the CY41r2 is significantly better or worse than the CY41r1.
Symbol legend: for a given forecast step... (d: score difference, s: confidence interval width)
▲ CY41r2 better than CY41r1 statistically highly significant (the confidence bar above zero by more than its height )(d/s>3)
▴ CY41r2 better than CY41r1 statistically significant (d/s≥1)
░ CY41r2 better than CY41r1, yet not statistically significant (d/s≥0.5)
░ not really any difference between CY41r1 and CY41r2
░ CY41r2 worse than CY41r1, yet not statistically significant (d/s≤-0.5)
▾ CY41r2 worse than CY41r1 statistically significant (d/s≤-1)
▼ CY41r2 worse than CY41r1 statistically highly significant (the confidence bar below zero by more than its height) (d/s<-3)