MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Using CNN-LSTM Model for Weather Forecasting

2022· article· en· W4318147647 on OpenAlex
Michael K.H. Fan, Omar Imran, Arka Singh, Samuel A. Ajila

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Load and Power Forecasting
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceDeep learningGeneralizationArtificial neural networkWeather forecastingArtificial intelligenceFeature (linguistics)Data modelingBig dataMachine learningNumerical weather predictionData miningMeteorologyDatabaseGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An efficient and cost-effective weather forecasting approach can be used to protect humans and benefit economic growth as a result of secure forest, agriculture, and tourism industry sectors. This paper is based on the IEEE Big Data IARAI’s Weather4cast 2021 challenge dataset. The goal of this paper is to consider computational cost of predicting future weather forecast by using a CNN-LSTM based neural network model. The network utilizes an encoder-decoder architecture to predict future weather images. All the four variables are predicted using the same model providing generalization in the solution. The model is trained and tested on the Nile Region (R1) data and a significant improvement is observed for the loss against cloud mask and rainfall feature prediction in comparison with CNNGRU deep learning model. Two models – shallow and deep models are compared and the results in terms of MSE values for the shallow model (which is computationally cost effective) is not too far from the deep model.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.001
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 head0.538
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.186 · 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