Articles | Volume 15, issue 23
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-8913-2022
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-8913-2022
Model experiment description paper
 | 
13 Dec 2022
Model experiment description paper |  | 13 Dec 2022

Representing chemical history in ozone time-series predictions – a model experiment study building on the MLAir (v1.5) deep learning framework

Felix Kleinert, Lukas H. Leufen, Aurelia Lupascu, Tim Butler, and Martin G. Schultz

Related authors

MLAir (v1.0) – a tool to enable fast and flexible machine learning on air data time series
Lukas Hubert Leufen, Felix Kleinert, and Martin G. Schultz
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 1553–1574, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1553-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1553-2021, 2021
Short summary
IntelliO3-ts v1.0: a neural network approach to predict near-surface ozone concentrations in Germany
Felix Kleinert, Lukas H. Leufen, and Martin G. Schultz
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 1–25, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1-2021, 2021
Short summary

Related subject area

Atmospheric sciences
Optimized dynamic mode decomposition for reconstruction and forecasting of atmospheric chemistry data
Meghana Velagar, Christoph Keller, and J. Nathan Kutz
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4667–4684, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4667-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4667-2025, 2025
Short summary
Interpolating turbulent heat fluxes missing from a prairie observation on the Tibetan Plateau using artificial intelligence models
Quanzhe Hou, Zhiqiu Gao, Zexia Duan, and Minghui Yu
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4625–4641, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4625-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4625-2025, 2025
Short summary
Carbon dioxide plume dispersion simulated at the hectometer scale using DALES: model formulation and observational evaluation
Arseniy Karagodin-Doyennel, Fredrik Jansson, Bart J. H. van Stratum, Hugo Denier van der Gon, Jordi Vilà-Guerau de Arellano, and Sander Houweling
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4571–4599, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4571-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4571-2025, 2025
Short summary
Low-level jets in the North and Baltic seas: mesoscale model sensitivity and climatology using WRF V4.2.1
Bjarke T. E. Olsen, Andrea N. Hahmann, Nicolas G. Alonso-de-Linaje, Mark Žagar, and Martin Dörenkämper
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4499–4533, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4499-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4499-2025, 2025
Short summary
SynRad v1.0: a radar forward operator to simulate synthetic weather radar observations from volcanic ash clouds
Vishnu Nair, Anujah Mohanathan, Michael Herzog, David G. Macfarlane, and Duncan A. Robertson
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4417–4432, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4417-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4417-2025, 2025
Short summary

Cited articles

Abdi‐Oskouei, M., Carmichael, G., Christiansen, M., Ferrada, G., Roozitalab, B., Sobhani, N., Wade, K., Czarnetzki, A., Pierce, R., Wagner, T., and Stanier, C.: Sensitivity of Meteorological Skill to Selection of WRF‐Chem Physical Parameterizations and Impact on Ozone Prediction During the Lake Michigan Ozone Study (LMOS), J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 125, e2019JD031971, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD031971, 2020. a
Aliaga, D., Sinclair, V. A., Andrade, M., Artaxo, P., Carbone, S., Kadantsev, E., Laj, P., Wiedensohler, A., Krejci, R., and Bianchi, F.: Identifying source regions of air masses sampled at the tropical high-altitude site of Chacaltaya using WRF-FLEXPART and cluster analysis, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 16453–16477, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-16453-2021, 2021. a
Archibald, A. T., Neu, J. L., Elshorbany, Y. F., Cooper, O. R., Young, P. J., Akiyoshi, H., Cox, R. A., Coyle, M., Derwent, R. G., Deushi, M., Finco, A., Frost, G. J., Galbally, I. E., Gerosa, G., Granier, C., Griffiths, P. T., Hossaini, R., Hu, L., Jöckel, P., Josse, B., Lin, M. Y., Mertens, M., Morgenstern, O., Naja, M., Naik, V., Oltmans, S., Plummer, D. A., Revell, L. E., Saiz-Lopez, A., Saxena, P., Shin, Y. M., Shahid, I., Shallcross, D., Tilmes, S., Trickl, T., Wallington, T. J., Wang, T., Worden, H. M., and Zeng, G.: Tropospheric Ozone Assessment Report: A critical review of changes in the tropospheric ozone burden and budget from 1850 to 2100, Elementa, 8, 034, https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.2020.034, 2020. a
Avnery, S., Mauzerall, D. L., Liu, J., and Horowitz, L. W.: Global crop yield reductions due to surface ozone exposure: 1. Year 2000 crop production losses and economic damage, Atmos. Environ., 45, 2284–2296, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.11.045, 2011. a
Download
Short summary
We examine the effects of spatially aggregated upstream information as input for a deep learning model forecasting near-surface ozone levels. Using aggregated data from one upstream sector (45°) improves the forecast by ~ 10 % for 4 prediction days. Three upstream sectors improve the forecasts by ~ 14 % on the first 2 d only. Our results serve as an orientation for other researchers or environmental agencies focusing on pointwise time-series predictions, for example, due to regulatory purposes.
Share