MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Improving WAVEWATCH III hindcasts with machine learning

2023· article· en· W4386047269 on OpenAlex

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

VenueCoastal Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOcean Waves and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsBGC Engineering (Canada)
FundersCentro de Investigación e Innovación en Energía Marina
KeywordsHindcastSignificant wave heightMean squared errorComputer scienceArtificial neural networkWind waveWave heightMeteorologyEnvironmental scienceArtificial intelligenceMachine learningGeologyMathematicsStatisticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, machine learning models are used to improve a wave hindcast database created using WAVEWATCH III® (WW3) for the Chilean coast. The models were trained with 50,505 data entries from two buoys and eleven ADCPs. The machine learning models significantly improved the results from WW3 for three parameters: significant wave height , mean wave period, and mean wave direction. Our best performing model, which is based on a convolutional neural network and uses the directional wave spectrum as input, reduced root mean squared errors in the significant wave height by 71%, peak wave period by 61% and mean wave direction by 63%. Most importantly, our method dramatically improved the mean wave direction in four locations where WW3 was particularly problematic (absolute error reduction of 20°). The neural network corrections can also be applied to other locations if sea states conditions are similar to the training data. The research presented here show that machine learning techniques are a fast and effective way to improve existing wave hindcast databases at relatively low cost.

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)0.000
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 score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.450

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.157
Teacher spread0.151 · 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