Short-lead seasonal precipitation forecast in northeastern Brazil using an ensemble of artificial neural networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study assesses the deterministic and probabilistic forecasting skill of a 1-month-lead ensemble of Artificial Neural Networks (EANN) based on low-frequency climate oscillation indices. The predictand is the February-April (FMA) rainfall in the Brazilian state of Ceará, which is a prominent subject in climate forecasting studies due to its high seasonal predictability. Additionally, the study proposes combining the EANN with dynamical models into a hybrid multi-model ensemble (MME). The forecast verification is carried out through a leave-one-out cross-validation based on 40 years of data. The EANN forecasting skill is compared with traditional statistical models and the dynamical models that compose Ceará's operational seasonal forecasting system. A spatial comparison showed that the EANN was among the models with the smallest Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) and Ranked Probability Score (RPS) in most regions. Moreover, the analysis of the area-aggregated reliability showed that the EANN is better calibrated than the individual dynamical models and has better resolution than Multinomial Logistic Regression for above-normal (AN) and below-normal (BN) categories. It is also shown that combining the EANN and dynamical models into a hybrid MME reduces the overconfidence of the extreme categories observed in a dynamically-based MME, improving the reliability of the forecasting system.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".