  Improving the accuracy of forecast models for physical systems such as the
atmosphere is a crucial ongoing effort. Errors in state estimation for these
often highly nonlinear systems has been the primary focus of recent research,
but as that error has been successfully diminished, the role of model error in
forecast uncertainty has duly increased. The present study is an investigation
of a particular empirical correction procedure that is of special interest
because it considers the model a "black box", and therefore can be applied
widely with little modification. The procedure involves the comparison of short
model forecasts with a reference "truth" system during a training period in
order to calculate systematic (1) state-independent model bias and (2)
state-dependent error patterns. An estimate of the likelihood of the latter
error component is computed from the current state at every timestep of model
integration. The effectiveness of this technique is explored in two
experiments: (1) a perfect model scenario, in which models have the same
structure and dynamics as the true system, differing only in parameter values;
and (2) a more realistic scenario, in which models are structurally different
(in dynamics, dimension, and parameterization) from the target system. In each
case, the results suggest that the correction procedure is more effective for
reducing error and prolonging forecast usefulness than parameter tuning.
However, the cost of this increase in average forecast accuracy is the creation
of substantial qualitative differences between the dynamics of the corrected
model and the true system. A method to mitigate the structural damage caused by
empirical correction and further increase forecast accuracy is presented.
