Towards replacing precipitation ensemble predictions systems using machine learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Forecasting precipitation accurately poses significant challenges due to various factors affecting its distribution and intensity, including but not limited to subgrid variability. Although higher resolution simulations are often considered to improve precipitation forecasts, it is crucial to note that simply increasing resolution may not suffice without appropriate adjustments to parameterization schemes or tuning. Traditionally, ensembles of simulations are used to generate uncertainty predictions associated with precipitation forecasts, but this approach can be computationally intensive. As an alternative, there is a growing trend towards leveraging neural networks for precipitation prediction, which offers potential computational advantages. We propose a new approach to generating ensemble weather predictions for high‐resolution precipitation without requiring high‐resolution training data. The method uses generative adversarial networks to learn the complex patterns of precipitation and produce diverse and realistic precipitation fields, allowing to generate realistic precipitation ensemble members using only the available control forecast. We demonstrate the feasibility of generating realistic precipitation ensemble members on unseen higher resolutions. We use evaluation metrics such as RMSE, CRPS, rank histogram and ROC curves to demonstrate that our generated ensemble is almost identical to the ECMWF IFS ensemble, on which our model was trained on.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".