Abstract
Verification of probabilistic forecasts for extreme events has been a veryactive field of research, stirred by media and public opinions who naturallyfocus their attention on extreme events, and easily draw biased onclusions. Inthis context, classical verification methodologies tailored for extreme events,such as thresholded and weighted scoring rules, have undesirable propertiesthat cannot be mitigated; the well-known Continuous Ranked Probability Score(CRPS) makes no exception. In this paper, we define a formal framework toassess the behavior of forecast evaluation procedures with respect to extremeevents, that we use to point out that assessment based on the expectation of aproper score is not suitable for extremes. As an alternative, we propose tostudy the properties of the CRPS as a random variable using extreme valuetheory to address extreme events verification. To compare calibrated forecasts,an index is introduced that summarizes the ability of probabilistic forecaststo predict extremes. Its strengths and limitations are discussed using boththeoretical arguments and simulations.