Articles | Volume 16, issue 20
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5895-2023
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5895-2023
Model evaluation paper
 | 
20 Oct 2023
Model evaluation paper |  | 20 Oct 2023

Key factors for quantitative precipitation nowcasting using ground weather radar data based on deep learning

Daehyeon Han, Jungho Im, Yeji Shin, and Juhyun Lee

Related authors

Enhanced methane monitoring: A globally harmonized daily 0.1° XCH4 through machine learning-based fusion of GOSAT, GOSAT-2, and TROPOMI
Jebun Naher Keya, Yejin Kim, Hyunyoung Choi, and Jungho Im
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1034,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1034, 2026
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Measurement Techniques (AMT).
Short summary

Cited articles

Adewoyin, R. A., Dueben, P., Watson, P., He, Y., and Dutta, R.: TRU-NET: a deep learning approach to high resolution prediction of rainfall, Mach. Learn., 110, 2035–2062, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10994-021-06022-6, 2021. 
Agrawal, S., Barrington, L., Bromberg, C., Burge, J., Gazen, C., and Hickey, J.: Machine learning for precipitation nowcasting from radar images, arXiv [preprint], arXiv:1912.12132, 2019. 
Albu, A.-I., Czibula, G., Mihai, A., Czibula, I. G., Burcea, S., and Mezghani, A.: NeXtNow: A Convolutional Deep Learning Model for the Prediction of Weather Radar Data for Nowcasting Purposes, Remote Sens.-Basel, 14, 3890, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14163890, 2022. 
Aswin, S., Geetha, P., and Vinayakumar, R.: Deep learning models for the prediction of rainfall, 2018 International Conference on Communication and Signal Processing (ICCSP), 0657–0661, 2018. 
Ayzel, G.: RainNet: a convolutional neural network for radar-based precipitation nowcasting, GitHub [code], https://github.com/hydrogo/rainnet (last access: 18 September 2023), 2020. 
Download
Short summary
To identify the key factors affecting quantitative precipitation nowcasting (QPN) using deep learning (DL), we carried out a comprehensive evaluation and analysis. We compared four key factors: DL model, length of the input sequence, loss function, and ensemble approach. Generally, U-Net outperformed ConvLSTM. Loss function and ensemble showed potential for improving performance when they synergized well. The length of the input sequence did not significantly affect the results.
Share