MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4306925940 · doi:10.3390/hydrology9100186

Development of a Machine Learning Framework to Aid Climate Model Assessment and Improvement: Case Study of Surface Soil Moisture

2022· article· en· W4306925940 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Francisco Andree Ramírez Casas, Laxmi Sushama, Bernardo Teufel

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Moisture and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsClimate modelRandom forestClimate changeEnvironmental scienceSnowmeltEmulationClimatologyMeteorologyRelative humidityMean squared errorSnowWater contentDownscalingRange (aeronautics)Computer scienceMachine learningStatisticsMathematicsPrecipitationGeographyGeologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of a computationally efficient machine learning-based framework to understand the underlying causes for biases in climate model simulated fields is presented in this study. The framework consists of a two-step approach, with the first step involving the development of a Random Forest (RF) model, trained on observed data of the climate variable of interest and related predictors. The second step involves emulations of the climate variable of interest with the RF model developed in step one by replacing the observed predictors with those from the climate model one at a time. The assumption is that comparing these emulations with that of a reference emulation driven by all observed predictors can shed light on the contribution of respective predictor biases to the biases in the climate model simulation. The proposed framework is used to understand the biases in the Global Environmental Multiscale (GEM) model simulated surface soil moisture (SSM) for the April–September period, over a domain covering part of north-east Canada. The grid cell-based RF model, trained on daily SSM and related climate predictors (water availability, 2 m temperature, relative humidity, snowmelt, maximum snow water equivalent) from the fifth generation European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts reanalysis (ERA5), demonstrates great skill in emulating SSM, with root mean square error of 0.036. Comparison of the five RF emulations based on GEM predictors with that based on ERA5 predictors suggests that the biases in the mean April–September SSM can be attributed mainly to biases in three predictors: water availability, 2 m temperature and relative humidity. The regions where these predictors contribute to biases in SSM are mostly collocated with the regions where they are shown to be the among the top three influential predictors through the predictor importance analysis, i.e., 2 m temperature in the southern part of the domain, relative humidity in the northern part of the domain and water availability over rest of the domain. The framework, without having to undertake expensive simulations with the climate model, thus successfully identifies the main causes for SSM biases, albeit with slightly reduced skill for heavily perturbed simulations. Furthermore, identification of the causes for biases, by informing targeted climate model improvements, can lead to additional reductions in computational costs.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.479

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHydrologySame topicSoil Moisture and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207