MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3160299330 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu21-16390

Machine Learning Methods to Infer Precipitation Phase from Temperature and Moisture Profiles

2021· article· en· W3160299330 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dominique Brunet, John Rafael Ranieses Quinto

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowPrecipitationEnvironmental scienceMoistureDew pointFraction (chemistry)Wet-bulb temperatureMeteorologyWinter stormDewAlbedo (alchemy)Rain and snow mixedPhase (matter)Atmospheric sciencesHumidityChemistryGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The phase of falling precipitation can have a large societal impact for both hydrology (snow storage, rain-on-snow events), meteorology (snowstorms, freezing rain) and climate (snow albedo feedback). In Canada, many surface weather stations report precipitation information in the form of total precipitation (liquid-equivalent), but very few weather stations directly report snow. Thus, precipitation phase must be inferred from ancillary data such as temperature and moisture. Each scientific community has developed its own tool for the determination phase in the absence of direct observations: from simple rules based on air temperature, dew point temperature or wet bulb temperature to sophisticated microphysics schemes passing by methods based on the discrimination of features extracted from vertical temperature profiles. With the recent advances of machine learning, there is an opportunity to investigate another set of methods based on deep neural networks. Using ERA5 and ERA5-Land model re-analyses as the reference, we trained several recurrent neural networks (RNN) on vertical profiles of temperature and moisture to infer the snow fraction – the ratio of solid precipitation to total precipitation. Since precipitation phase (solid, liquid or mixed) was not directly available in the model re-analysis, we defined it using two thresholds: snow fraction of less than 5% for liquid, snow fraction of more than 95% for solid phase, and mixed phase for everything in between. The best performing neural network for regressing snow fraction is found to be a Gated Recurrent Unit (GRU) RNN using profiles up to 500 hPa above the surface of both temperature and relative humidity. A slight decrease in performance is observed if profiles up to 700 hPa are used instead. A feature experiment also reveals that the performance is significantly better when using both temperature and moisture profiles, but it does not really matter what type of moisture observations are used (either dew point spread, wet bulb temperature or relative humidity). For classifying precipitation phase, the balanced accuracy is over 90%, clearly outperforming the implementation of Bourgouin’s method used operationally in part of Canada. Compared with the K-Nearest Neighborhood (KNN) method trained on surface observations only, it is seen that the greatest gain in performance for GRU-RNN is when the surface temperature is close to zero degrees Celsius. These preliminary results indicate the great potential of the proposed algorithm for determining snow fraction and precipitation phase in the absence of direct observations. The proposed algorithm could potentially be used for inferring snow fraction and precipitation phase in several applications such as (1) precipitation analysis for forcing hydrological models, (2) weather nowcasting, (3) weather forecast post-processing and (4) climate change impact studies.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCryospheric studies and observations→French-language works237,207→