MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386233852 · doi:10.1109/access.2023.3309054

Machine Learning Approaches to Improve North American Precipitation Forecasts

2023· article· en· W4386233852 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Cenker Sengoz, Sheela Ramanna, Scott Kehler, Rushil Goomer, Paul Pries

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNumerical weather predictionBaseline (sea)Machine learningMean squared errorComputer scienceArtificial neural networkArtificial intelligenceWeather forecastingForecast skillMean absolute percentage errorMean absolute errorMeteorologyStatisticsMathematicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Numerical weather prediction (NWP) is a challenging task which involves working with micro and macro-scale spatio-temporal parameters susceptible to biases and accuracy problems. In recent years, machine learning has grown in popularity with the increasing demand in accurate weather predictions. In this study, we adopt a multimodel (ensemble) forecasting approach by collecting precipitation data from multiple NWP models of Canadian, American and European weather agencies in an effort to deploy an optimal machine learning-based weather model for real-time precipitation forecasting that will outperform the baseline. We considered 8 NWP models as inputs and combined them to create ensemble predictors using 5 different machine learning techniques along with a baseline model (mean of eight input NWP models). We demonstrate that machine learning approaches can improve upon the results of the individual NWP models. The best results were obtained by the neural-network variants with 17% improvement in the mean absolute error, 3% in the root mean squared error, 47% in the median absolute error, 5% in the maximum error, 70% in the relative bias, 41% in the false alarm ratio and 8% in the critical score index over the baseline. Neural networks also complied with the practicality constraints, with minutes of training time and near-real time prediction time.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.212
Threshold uncertainty score0.708

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.145 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsFrench-language works237,207