Articles | Volume 16, issue 22
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6433-2023
© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6433-2023
© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Review and perspective paper
| Highlight paper
| 
14 Nov 2023
Review and perspective paper | Highlight paper |
| 14 Nov 2023
| 14 Nov 2023
Machine learning for numerical weather and climate modelling: a review
Catherine O. de Burgh-Day
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
The Bureau of Meteorology, 700 Collins St, Docklands, Victoria, Australia
Tennessee Leeuwenburg
The Bureau of Meteorology, 700 Collins St, Docklands, Victoria, Australia
Related subject area
Earth and space science informatics
Overcoming barriers to enable convergence research by integrating ecological and climate sciences: the NCAR–NEON system Version 1
Ensemble of optimised machine learning algorithms for predicting surface soil moisture content at a global scale
Hazard assessment modeling and software development of earthquake-triggered landslides in the Sichuan–Yunnan area, China
A generalized spatial autoregressive neural network method for three-dimensional spatial interpolation
The Common Community Physics Package (CCPP) Framework v6
Causal deep learning models for studying the Earth system
A methodological framework for improving the performance of data-driven models: a case study for daily runoff prediction in the Maumee domain, USA
SHAFTS (v2022.3): a deep-learning-based Python package for simultaneous extraction of building height and footprint from sentinel imagery
Bayesian atmospheric correction over land: Sentinel-2/MSI and Landsat 8/OLI
Twenty-five years of the IPCC Data Distribution Centre at the DKRZ and the Reference Data Archive for CMIP data
Effectiveness and computational efficiency of absorbing boundary conditions for full-waveform inversion
LAND-SUITE V1.0: a suite of tools for statistically based landslide susceptibility zonation
Towards physics-inspired data-driven weather forecasting: integrating data assimilation with a deep spatial-transformer-based U-NET in a case study with ERA5
Fast infrared radiative transfer calculations using graphics processing units: JURASSIC-GPU v2.0
CSDMS: a community platform for numerical modeling of Earth surface processes
A new methodological framework for geophysical sensor combinations associated with machine learning algorithms to understand soil attributes
Model calibration using ESEm v1.1.0 – an open, scalable Earth system emulator
Turbidity maximum zone index: a novel model for remote extraction of the turbidity maximum zone in different estuaries
dh2loop 1.0: an open-source Python library for automated processing and classification of geological logs
Copula-based synthetic data augmentation for machine-learning emulators
Automated geological map deconstruction for 3D model construction using map2loop 1.0 and map2model 1.0
A spatially explicit approach to simulate urban heat mitigation with InVEST (v3.8.0)
S-SOM v1.0: a structural self-organizing map algorithm for weather typing
Using Shapley additive explanations to interpret extreme gradient boosting predictions of grassland degradation in Xilingol, China
Current status on the need for improved accessibility to climate models code
ClimateNet: an expert-labeled open dataset and deep learning architecture for enabling high-precision analyses of extreme weather
A spatiotemporal weighted regression model (STWR v1.0) for analyzing local nonstationarity in space and time
A new end-to-end workflow for the Community Earth System Model (version 2.0) for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6)
HyLands 1.0: a hybrid landscape evolution model to simulate the impact of landslides and landslide-derived sediment on landscape evolution
Comparative analysis of atmospheric radiative transfer models using the Atmospheric Look-up table Generator (ALG) toolbox (version 2.0)
Fast domain-aware neural network emulation of a planetary boundary layer parameterization in a numerical weather forecast model
VISIR-1.b: ocean surface gravity waves and currents for energy-efficient navigation
Topological data analysis and machine learning for recognizing atmospheric river patterns in large climate datasets
Global hydro-climatic biomes identified via multitask learning
A run control framework to streamline profiling, porting, and tuning simulation runs and provenance tracking of geoscientific applications
An improved logistic regression model based on a spatially weighted technique (ILRBSWT v1.0) and its application to mineral prospectivity mapping
High-performance software framework for the calculation of satellite-to-satellite data matchups (MMS version 1.2)
A data model of the Climate and Forecast metadata conventions (CF-1.6) with a software implementation (cf-python v2.1)
Reverse engineering model structures for soil and ecosystem respiration: the potential of gene expression programming
A high-fidelity multiresolution digital elevation model for Earth systems
CPMIP: measurements of real computational performance of Earth system models in CMIP6
Automatic delineation of geomorphological slope units with r.slopeunits v1.0 and their optimization for landslide susceptibility modeling
Community Intercomparison Suite (CIS) v1.4.0: a tool for intercomparing models and observations
Asynchronous communication in spectral-element and discontinuous Galerkin methods for atmospheric dynamics – a case study using the High-Order Methods Modeling Environment (HOMME-homme_dg_branch)
GO2OGS 1.0: a versatile workflow to integrate complex geological information with fault data into numerical simulation models
An open and extensible framework for spatially explicit land use change modelling: the lulcc R package
Plant functional type classification for earth system models: results from the European Space Agency's Land Cover Climate Change Initiative
Non-singular spherical harmonic expressions of geomagnetic vector and gradient tensor fields in the local north-oriented reference frame
An approach to enhance pnetCDF performance in environmental modeling applications
A strategy for GIS-based 3-D slope stability modelling over large areas
Danica L. Lombardozzi, William R. Wieder, Negin Sobhani, Gordon B. Bonan, David Durden, Dawn Lenz, Michael SanClements, Samantha Weintraub-Leff, Edward Ayres, Christopher R. Florian, Kyla Dahlin, Sanjiv Kumar, Abigail L. S. Swann, Claire M. Zarakas, Charles Vardeman, and Valerio Pascucci
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 5979–6000, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5979-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5979-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We present a novel cyberinfrastructure system that uses National Ecological Observatory Network measurements to run Community Terrestrial System Model point simulations in a containerized system. The simple interface and tutorials expand access to data and models used in Earth system research by removing technical barriers and facilitating research, educational opportunities, and community engagement. The NCAR–NEON system enables convergence of climate and ecological sciences.
Qianqian Han, Yijian Zeng, Lijie Zhang, Calimanut-Ionut Cira, Egor Prikaziuk, Ting Duan, Chao Wang, Brigitta Szabó, Salvatore Manfreda, Ruodan Zhuang, and Bob Su
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 5825–5845, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5825-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5825-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Using machine learning, we estimated global surface soil moisture (SSM) to aid in understanding water, energy, and carbon exchange. Ensemble models outperformed individual algorithms in predicting SSM under different climates. The best-performing ensemble included K-neighbours Regressor, Random Forest Regressor, and Extreme Gradient Boosting. This is important for hydrological and climatological applications such as water cycle monitoring, irrigation management, and crop yield prediction.
Xiaoyi Shao, Siyuan Ma, and Chong Xu
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 5113–5129, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5113-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-5113-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Scientific understandings of the distribution of coseismic landslides, followed by emergency and medium- and long-term risk assessment, can reduce landslide risk. The aim of this study is to propose an improved three-stage spatial prediction strategy and develop corresponding hazard assessment software called Mat.LShazard V1.0, which provides a new application tool for coseismic landslide disaster prevention and mitigation in different stages.
Junda Zhan, Sensen Wu, Jin Qi, Jindi Zeng, Mengjiao Qin, Yuanyuan Wang, and Zhenhong Du
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 2777–2794, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-2777-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-2777-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We develop a generalized spatial autoregressive neural network model used for three-dimensional spatial interpolation. Taking the different changing trend of geographic elements along various directions into consideration, the model defines spatial distance in a generalized way and integrates it into the process of spatial interpolation with the theories of spatial autoregression and neural network. Compared with traditional methods, the model achieves better performance and is more adaptable.
Dominikus Heinzeller, Ligia Bernardet, Grant Firl, Man Zhang, Xia Sun, and Michael Ek
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 2235–2259, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-2235-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-2235-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The Common Community Physics Package is a collection of physical atmospheric parameterizations for use in Earth system models and a framework that couples the physics to a host model’s dynamical core. A primary goal for this effort is to facilitate research and development of physical parameterizations and physics–dynamics coupling methods while offering capabilities for numerical weather prediction operations, for example in the upcoming implementation of the Global Forecast System (GFS) v17.
Tobias Tesch, Stefan Kollet, and Jochen Garcke
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 2149–2166, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-2149-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-2149-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
A recent statistical approach for studying relations in the Earth system is to train deep learning (DL) models to predict Earth system variables given one or several others and use interpretable DL to analyze the relations learned by the models. Here, we propose to combine the approach with a theorem from causality research to ensure that the deep learning model learns causal rather than spurious relations. As an example, we apply the method to study soil-moisture–precipitation coupling.
Yao Hu, Chirantan Ghosh, and Siamak Malakpour-Estalaki
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 1925–1936, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1925-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1925-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Data-driven models (DDMs) gain popularity in earth and environmental systems, thanks in large part to advancements in data collection techniques and artificial intelligence (AI). The performance of these models is determined by the underlying machine learning (ML) algorithms. In this study, we develop a framework to improve the model performance by optimizing ML algorithms and demonstrate the effectiveness of the framework using a DDM to predict edge-of-field runoff in the Maumee domain, USA.
Ruidong Li, Ting Sun, Fuqiang Tian, and Guang-Heng Ni
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 751–778, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-751-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-751-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We developed SHAFTS (Simultaneous building Height And FootprinT extraction from Sentinel imagery), a multi-task deep-learning-based Python package, to estimate average building height and footprint from Sentinel imagery. Evaluation in 46 cities worldwide shows that SHAFTS achieves significant improvement over existing machine-learning-based methods.
Feng Yin, Philip E. Lewis, and Jose L. Gómez-Dans
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 7933–7976, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-7933-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-7933-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The proposed SIAC atmospheric correction method provides consistent surface reflectance estimations from medium spatial-resolution satellites (Sentinel 2 and Landsat 8) with per-pixel uncertainty information. The outputs from SIAC have been validated against a wide range of ground measurements, and it shows that SIAC can provide accurate estimations of both surface reflectance and atmospheric parameters, with meaningful uncertainty information.
Martina Stockhause and Michael Lautenschlager
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 6047–6058, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6047-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6047-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The Data Distribution Centre (DDC) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) celebrates its 25th anniversary in 2022. DDC Partner DKRZ has supported the IPCC Assessments and preserved the quality-assured, citable climate model data underpinning the Assessment Reports over these years over the long term. With the introduction of the IPCC FAIR Guidelines into the current AR6, the value of DDC services has been recognized. However, DDC sustainability remains unresolved.
Daiane Iglesia Dolci, Felipe A. G. Silva, Pedro S. Peixoto, and Ernani V. Volpe
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 5857–5881, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-5857-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-5857-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We investigate and compare the theoretical and computational characteristics of several absorbing boundary conditions (ABCs) for the full-waveform inversion (FWI) problem. The different ABCs are implemented in an optimized computational framework called Devito. The computational efficiency and memory requirements of the ABC methods are evaluated in the forward and adjoint wave propagators, from simple to realistic velocity models.
Mauro Rossi, Txomin Bornaetxea, and Paola Reichenbach
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 5651–5666, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-5651-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-5651-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
LAND-SUITE is a software package designed to support landslide susceptibility zonation. The software integrates, extends, and completes LAND-SE (Rossi et al., 2010; Rossi and Reichenbach, 2016). The software is implemented in R, a free software environment for statistical computing and graphics, and gives expert users the possibility to perform easier, more flexible, and more informed statistically based landslide susceptibility applications and zonations.
Ashesh Chattopadhyay, Mustafa Mustafa, Pedram Hassanzadeh, Eviatar Bach, and Karthik Kashinath
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 2221–2237, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2221-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2221-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
There is growing interest in data-driven weather forecasting, i.e., to predict the weather by using a deep neural network that learns from the evolution of past atmospheric patterns. Here, we propose three components to add to the current data-driven weather forecast models to improve their performance. These components involve a feature that incorporates physics into the neural network, a method to add data assimilation, and an algorithm to use several different time intervals in the forecast.
Paul F. Baumeister and Lars Hoffmann
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 1855–1874, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-1855-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-1855-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The efficiency of the numerical simulation of radiative transport is shown on modern server-class graphics cards (GPUs). The low-cost prefactor on GPUs compared to general-purpose processors (CPUs) enables future large retrieval campaigns for multi-channel data from infrared sounders aboard low-orbit satellites. The validated research software JURASSIC is available in the public domain.
Gregory E. Tucker, Eric W. H. Hutton, Mark D. Piper, Benjamin Campforts, Tian Gan, Katherine R. Barnhart, Albert J. Kettner, Irina Overeem, Scott D. Peckham, Lynn McCready, and Jaia Syvitski
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 1413–1439, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-1413-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-1413-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Scientists use computer simulation models to understand how Earth surface processes work, including floods, landslides, soil erosion, river channel migration, ocean sedimentation, and coastal change. Research benefits when the software for simulation modeling is open, shared, and coordinated. The Community Surface Dynamics Modeling System (CSDMS) is a US-based facility that supports research by providing community support, computing tools and guidelines, and educational resources.
Danilo César de Mello, Gustavo Vieira Veloso, Marcos Guedes de Lana, Fellipe Alcantara de Oliveira Mello, Raul Roberto Poppiel, Diego Ribeiro Oquendo Cabrero, Luis Augusto Di Loreto Di Raimo, Carlos Ernesto Gonçalves Reynaud Schaefer, Elpídio Inácio Fernandes Filho, Emilson Pereira Leite, and José Alexandre Melo Demattê
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 1219–1246, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-1219-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-1219-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We used soil parent material, terrain attributes, and geophysical data from the soil surface to test and compare different and unprecedented geophysical sensor combination, as well as different machine learning algorithms to model and predict several soil attributes. Also, we analyzed the importance of pedoenvironmental variables. The soil attributes were modeled throughout different machine learning algorithms and related to different geophysical sensor combinations.
Duncan Watson-Parris, Andrew Williams, Lucia Deaconu, and Philip Stier
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 7659–7672, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-7659-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-7659-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The Earth System Emulator (ESEm) provides a fast and flexible framework for emulating a wide variety of Earth science datasets and tools for constraining (or tuning) models of any complexity. Three distinct use cases are presented that demonstrate the utility of ESEm and provide some insight into the use of machine learning for emulation in these different settings. The open-source Python package is freely available so that it might become a valuable tool for the community.
Chongyang Wang, Li Wang, Danni Wang, Dan Li, Chenghu Zhou, Hao Jiang, Qiong Zheng, Shuisen Chen, Kai Jia, Yangxiaoyue Liu, Ji Yang, Xia Zhou, and Yong Li
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 6833–6846, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-6833-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-6833-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The turbidity maximum zone (TMZ) is a special phenomenon in estuaries worldwide. However, the extraction methods and criteria used to describe the TMZ vary significantly both spatially and temporally. This study proposes an new index, the turbidity maximum zone index, based on the corresponding relationship of total suspended solid concentration and Chl a concentration, which could better extract TMZs in different estuaries and on different dates.
Ranee Joshi, Kavitha Madaiah, Mark Jessell, Mark Lindsay, and Guillaume Pirot
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 6711–6740, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-6711-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-6711-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We have developed a software that allows the user to extract and standardize drill hole information from legacy datasets and/or different drilling campaigns. It also provides functionality to upscale the lithological information. These functionalities were possible by developing thesauri to identify and group geological terminologies together.
David Meyer, Thomas Nagler, and Robin J. Hogan
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 5205–5215, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5205-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5205-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
A major limitation in training machine-learning emulators is often caused by the lack of data. This paper presents a cheap way to increase the size of training datasets using statistical techniques and thereby improve the performance of machine-learning emulators.
Mark Jessell, Vitaliy Ogarko, Yohan de Rose, Mark Lindsay, Ranee Joshi, Agnieszka Piechocka, Lachlan Grose, Miguel de la Varga, Laurent Ailleres, and Guillaume Pirot
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 5063–5092, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5063-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5063-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We have developed software that allows the user to extract sufficient information from unmodified digital maps and associated datasets that we are able to use to automatically build 3D geological models. By automating the process we are able to remove human bias from the procedure, which makes the workflow reproducible.
Martí Bosch, Maxence Locatelli, Perrine Hamel, Roy P. Remme, Jérôme Chenal, and Stéphane Joost
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3521–3537, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3521-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3521-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The article presents a novel approach to simulate urban heat mitigation from land use/land cover data based on three biophysical mechanisms: tree shade, evapotranspiration and albedo. An automated procedure is proposed to calibrate the model parameters to best fit temperature observations from monitoring stations. A case study in Lausanne, Switzerland, shows that the approach outperforms regressions based on satellite data and provides valuable insights into design heat mitigation policies.
Quang-Van Doan, Hiroyuki Kusaka, Takuto Sato, and Fei Chen
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 2097–2111, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2097-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2097-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This study proposes a novel structural self-organizing map (S-SOM) algorithm. The superiority of S-SOM is that it can better recognize the difference (or similarity) among spatial (or temporal) data used for training and thus improve the clustering quality compared to traditional SOM algorithms.
Batunacun, Ralf Wieland, Tobia Lakes, and Claas Nendel
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 1493–1510, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1493-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1493-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) can provide alternative insights that conventional land-use models are unable to generate. Shapley additive explanations (SHAP) can interpret the results of the purely data-driven approach. XGBoost achieved similar and robust simulation results. SHAP values were useful for analysing the complex relationship between the different drivers of grassland degradation.
Juan A. Añel, Michael García-Rodríguez, and Javier Rodeiro
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 923–934, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-923-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-923-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This work shows that it continues to be hard, if not impossible, to obtain some of the most used climate models worldwide. We reach this conclusion through a systematic study and encourage all development teams and research centres to make public the models they use to produce scientific results.
Prabhat, Karthik Kashinath, Mayur Mudigonda, Sol Kim, Lukas Kapp-Schwoerer, Andre Graubner, Ege Karaismailoglu, Leo von Kleist, Thorsten Kurth, Annette Greiner, Ankur Mahesh, Kevin Yang, Colby Lewis, Jiayi Chen, Andrew Lou, Sathyavat Chandran, Ben Toms, Will Chapman, Katherine Dagon, Christine A. Shields, Travis O'Brien, Michael Wehner, and William Collins
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 107–124, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-107-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-107-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Detecting extreme weather events is a crucial step in understanding how they change due to climate change. Deep learning (DL) is remarkable at pattern recognition; however, it works best only when labeled datasets are available. We create
ClimateNet– an expert-labeled curated dataset – to train a DL model for detecting weather events and predicting changes in extreme precipitation. This work paves the way for DL-based automated, high-fidelity, and highly precise analytics of climate data.
Xiang Que, Xiaogang Ma, Chao Ma, and Qiyu Chen
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 6149–6164, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-6149-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-6149-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
This paper presents a spatiotemporal weighted regression (STWR) model for exploring nonstationary spatiotemporal processes in nature and socioeconomics. A value change rate is introduced in the temporal kernel, which presents significant model fitting and accuracy in both simulated and real-world data. STWR fully incorporates observed data in the past and outperforms geographic temporal weighted regression (GTWR) and geographic weighted regression (GWR) models in several experiments.
Sheri Mickelson, Alice Bertini, Gary Strand, Kevin Paul, Eric Nienhouse, John Dennis, and Mariana Vertenstein
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 5567–5581, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5567-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5567-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Every generation of MIP exercises introduces new layers of complexity and an exponential growth in the amount of data requested. CMIP6 required us to develop a new tool chain and forced us to change our methodologies. The new methods discussed in this paper provided us with an 18 times faster speedup over our existing methods. This allowed us to meet our deadlines and we were able to publish more than half a million data sets on the Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF) for the CMIP6 project.
Benjamin Campforts, Charles M. Shobe, Philippe Steer, Matthias Vanmaercke, Dimitri Lague, and Jean Braun
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 3863–3886, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-3863-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-3863-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Landslides shape the Earth’s surface and are a dominant source of terrestrial sediment. Rivers, then, act as conveyor belts evacuating landslide-produced sediment. Understanding the interaction among rivers and landslides is important to predict the Earth’s surface response to past and future environmental changes and for mitigating natural hazards. We develop HyLands, a new numerical model that provides a toolbox to explore how landslides and rivers interact over several timescales.
Jorge Vicent, Jochem Verrelst, Neus Sabater, Luis Alonso, Juan Pablo Rivera-Caicedo, Luca Martino, Jordi Muñoz-Marí, and José Moreno
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 1945–1957, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-1945-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-1945-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The modeling of light propagation through the atmosphere is key to process satellite images and to understand atmospheric processes. However, existing atmospheric models can be complex to use in practical applications. Here we aim at providing a new software tool to facilitate using advanced models and to generate large databases of simulated data. As a test case, we use this tool to analyze differences between several atmospheric models, showing the capabilities of this open-source tool.
Jiali Wang, Prasanna Balaprakash, and Rao Kotamarthi
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 4261–4274, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4261-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4261-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
Parameterizations are frequently used in models representing physical phenomena and are often the computationally expensive portions of the code. Using model output from simulations performed using a weather model, we train deep neural networks to provide an accurate alternative to a physics-based parameterization. We demonstrate that a domain-aware deep neural network can successfully simulate the entire diurnal cycle of the boundary layer physics and the results are transferable.
Gianandrea Mannarini and Lorenzo Carelli
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 3449–3480, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3449-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3449-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
The VISIR ship-routing model is updated in order to deal with ocean currents.
The optimal tracks we computed through VISIR in the Atlantic ocean show great seasonal and regional variability, following a variable influence of surface gravity waves and currents. We assess how these tracks contribute to voyage energy-efficiency gains through a standard indicator (EEOI) of the International Maritime Organization. Also, the new model features are validated against an exact analytical benchmark.
Grzegorz Muszynski, Karthik Kashinath, Vitaliy Kurlin, Michael Wehner, and Prabhat
Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 613–628, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-613-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-613-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
We present the automated method for recognizing atmospheric rivers in climate data, i.e., climate model output and reanalysis product. The method is based on topological data analysis and machine learning, both of which are powerful tools that the climate science community often does not use. An advantage of the proposed method is that it is free of selection of subjective threshold conditions on a physical variable. This method is also suitable for rapidly analyzing large amounts of data.
Christina Papagiannopoulou, Diego G. Miralles, Matthias Demuzere, Niko E. C. Verhoest, and Willem Waegeman
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 4139–4153, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-4139-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-4139-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Common global land cover and climate classifications are based on vegetation–climatic characteristics derived from observational data, ignoring the interaction between the local climate and biome. Here, we model the interplay between vegetation and local climate by discovering spatial relationships among different locations. The resulting global
hydro-climatic biomescorrespond to regions of coherent climate–vegetation interactions that agree well with traditional global land cover maps.
Wendy Sharples, Ilya Zhukov, Markus Geimer, Klaus Goergen, Sebastian Luehrs, Thomas Breuer, Bibi Naz, Ketan Kulkarni, Slavko Brdar, and Stefan Kollet
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 2875–2895, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2875-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2875-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Next-generation geoscientific models are based on complex model implementations and workflows. Next-generation HPC systems require new programming paradigms and code optimization. In order to meet the challenge of running complex simulations on new massively parallel HPC systems, we developed a run control framework that facilitates code portability, code profiling, and provenance tracking to reduce both the duration and the cost of code migration and development, while ensuring reproducibility.
Daojun Zhang, Na Ren, and Xianhui Hou
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 2525–2539, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2525-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2525-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Geographically weighted regression is a widely used method to deal with spatial heterogeneity, which is common in geostatistics. However, most existing software does not support logistic regression and cannot deal with missing data, which exist extensively in mineral prospectivity mapping. This work generalized logistic regression to spatial statistics based on a spatially weighted technique. The new model also supports an anisotropic local window, which is another innovative point.
Thomas Block, Sabine Embacher, Christopher J. Merchant, and Craig Donlon
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 2419–2427, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2419-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-2419-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
For calibration and validation purposes it is necessary to detect simultaneous data acquisitions from different spaceborne platforms. We present an algorithm and a software system which implements a general approach to resolve this problem. The multisensor matchup system (MMS) can detect simultaneous acquisitions in a large dataset (> 100 TB) and extract data for matching locations for further analysis. The MMS implements a flexible software infrastructure and allows for high parallelization.
David Hassell, Jonathan Gregory, Jon Blower, Bryan N. Lawrence, and Karl E. Taylor
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 4619–4646, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-4619-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-4619-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
We present a formal data model for version 1.6 of the CF (Climate and Forecast) metadata conventions that provide a description of the physical meaning of geoscientific data and their spatial and temporal properties. We describe the CF conventions and how they lead to our CF data model, and compare it other data models for storing data and metadata. We present cf-python version 2.1: a software implementation of the CF data model capable of manipulating any CF-compliant dataset.
Iulia Ilie, Peter Dittrich, Nuno Carvalhais, Martin Jung, Andreas Heinemeyer, Mirco Migliavacca, James I. L. Morison, Sebastian Sippel, Jens-Arne Subke, Matthew Wilkinson, and Miguel D. Mahecha
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 3519–3545, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-3519-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-3519-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
Accurate representation of land-atmosphere carbon fluxes is essential for future climate projections, although some of the responses of CO2 fluxes to climate often remain uncertain. The increase in available data allows for new approaches in their modelling. We automatically developed models for ecosystem and soil carbon respiration using a machine learning approach. When compared with established respiration models, we found that they are better in prediction as well as offering new insights.
Xinqiao Duan, Lin Li, Haihong Zhu, and Shen Ying
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 239–253, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-239-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-239-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
This article proposes an optimized transformation for topographic datasets. The resulting topographic grid exhibits good surface approximation and quasi-uniform high-quality. Both features of the processed topography build a concrete base from which improved endogenous or exogenous parameters can be derived, and makes it suitable for Earth and environmental simulations.
Venkatramani Balaji, Eric Maisonnave, Niki Zadeh, Bryan N. Lawrence, Joachim Biercamp, Uwe Fladrich, Giovanni Aloisio, Rusty Benson, Arnaud Caubel, Jeffrey Durachta, Marie-Alice Foujols, Grenville Lister, Silvia Mocavero, Seth Underwood, and Garrett Wright
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 19–34, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-19-2017, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-19-2017, 2017
Short summary
Short summary
Climate models are among the most computationally expensive scientific applications in the world. We present a set of measures of computational performance that can be used to compare models that are independent of underlying hardware and the model formulation. They are easy to collect and reflect performance actually achieved in practice. We are preparing a systematic effort to collect these metrics for the world's climate models during CMIP6, the next Climate Model Intercomparison Project.
Massimiliano Alvioli, Ivan Marchesini, Paola Reichenbach, Mauro Rossi, Francesca Ardizzone, Federica Fiorucci, and Fausto Guzzetti
Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 3975–3991, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3975-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3975-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
Slope units are morphological mapping units bounded by drainage and divide lines that maximize within-unit homogeneity and between-unit heterogeneity. We use r.slopeunits, a software for the automatic delination of slope units. We outline an objective procedure to optimize the software input parameters for landslide susceptibility (LS) zonation. Optimization is achieved by maximizing an objective function that simultaneously evaluates terrain aspect segmentation quality and LS model performance.
Duncan Watson-Parris, Nick Schutgens, Nicholas Cook, Zak Kipling, Philip Kershaw, Edward Gryspeerdt, Bryan Lawrence, and Philip Stier
Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 3093–3110, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3093-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3093-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
In this paper we describe CIS, a new command line tool for the easy visualization, analysis and comparison of a wide variety of gridded and ungridded data sets used in Earth sciences. Users can now use a single tool to not only view plots of satellite, aircraft, station or model data, but also bring them onto the same spatio-temporal sampling. This allows robust, quantitative comparisons to be made easily. CIS is an open-source project and welcomes input from the community.
Benjamin F. Jamroz and Robert Klöfkorn
Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 2881–2892, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2881-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2881-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
The scalability of computational applications on current and next-generation supercomputers is increasingly limited by the cost of inter-process communication. We implement communication hiding data exchange in the High-Order Methods Modeling Environment (HOMME) for the time integration of the hydrostatic fluid equations using both the spectral-element and discontinuous Galerkin methods. The presented approach produces significant performance and scalability gains in large-scale simulations.
T. Fischer, D. Naumov, S. Sattler, O. Kolditz, and M. Walther
Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 3681–3694, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-3681-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-3681-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
We present a workflow to convert geological models into the open-source VTU format for usage in numerical simulation models. Tackling relevant scientific questions or engineering tasks often involves multidisciplinary approaches. Conversion workflows are needed between the diverse tools of the various disciplines. Our approach offers an open-source, platform-independent, robust, and comprehensible method that is potentially useful for a multitude of similar environmental studies.
S. Moulds, W. Buytaert, and A. Mijic
Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 3215–3229, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-3215-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-3215-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
The contribution of lulcc is to provide a free and open-source framework for land use change modelling. The software, which is provided as an R package, addresses problems associated with the current paradigm of closed-source, specialised land use change modelling software which disrupt the scientific process. It is an attempt to move the discipline towards open and transparent science and to ensure land use change models are accessible to scientists working across the geosciences.
B. Poulter, N. MacBean, A. Hartley, I. Khlystova, O. Arino, R. Betts, S. Bontemps, M. Boettcher, C. Brockmann, P. Defourny, S. Hagemann, M. Herold, G. Kirches, C. Lamarche, D. Lederer, C. Ottlé, M. Peters, and P. Peylin
Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 2315–2328, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-2315-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-2315-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
Land cover is an essential variable in earth system models and determines conditions driving biogeochemical, energy and water exchange between ecosystems and the atmosphere. A methodology is presented for mapping plant functional types used in global vegetation models from a updated land cover classification system and open-source conversion tool, resulting from a consultative process among map producers and modelers engaged in the European Space Agency’s Land Cover Climate Change Initiative.
J. Du, C. Chen, V. Lesur, and L. Wang
Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 1979–1990, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-1979-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-1979-2015, 2015
D. C. Wong, C. E. Yang, J. S. Fu, K. Wong, and Y. Gao
Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 1033–1046, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-1033-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-1033-2015, 2015
M. Mergili, I. Marchesini, M. Alvioli, M. Metz, B. Schneider-Muntau, M. Rossi, and F. Guzzetti
Geosci. Model Dev., 7, 2969–2982, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-2969-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-2969-2014, 2014
Short summary
Short summary
The article deals with strategies to (i) reduce computation time and to (ii) appropriately account for uncertain input parameters when applying an open source GIS sliding surface model to estimate landslide susceptibility for a 90km² study area in central Italy. For (i), the area is split into a large number of tiles, enabling the exploitation of multi-processor computing environments. For (ii), the model is run with various parameter combinations to compute the slope failure probability.
Cited articles
Ackmann, J., Düben, P. D., Palmer, T. N., and Smolarkiewicz, P. K.: Machine-learned preconditioners for linear solvers in geophysical fluid flows, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2010.02866, 6 October 2020.
Adams, S. V., Ford, R. W., Hambley, M., Hobson, J. M., Kavčič, I., Maynard, C. M., Melvin, T., Müller, E. H., Mullerworth, S., Porter, A. R. Rezny, M., Shipway, B. J., and Wong, R.: LFRic: Meeting the challenges of scalability and performance portability in Weather and Climate models, J. Parallel. Distr. Com., 132, 383–396, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpdc.2019.02.007, 2019.
Alemohammad, S. H., Fang, B., Konings, A. G., Aires, F., Green, J. K., Kolassa, J., Miralles, D., Prigent, C., and Gentine, P.: Water, Energy, and Carbon with Artificial Neural Networks (WECANN): a statistically based estimate of global surface turbulent fluxes and gross primary productivity using solar-induced fluorescence, Biogeosciences, 14, 4101–4124, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-14-4101-2017, 2017.
Arcomano, T., Szunyogh, I., Wikner, A., Pathak, J., Hunt, B. R., and Ott, E.: A Hybrid Approach to Atmospheric Modeling That Combines Machine Learning With a Physics-Based Numerical Model, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 14, e2021MS002712, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021MS002712, 2022.
Atkinson, S.: Bayesian hidden physics models: Uncertainty quantification for discovery of nonlinear partial differential operators from data, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2006.04228. 7 June 2020.
Bar-Sinai, Y., Hoyer, S., Hickey, J., and Brenner, M. P.: Learning data-driven discretizations for partial differential equations, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 116, 15344–15349, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1814058116. 2019.
Battaglia, P. W., Hamrick, J. B., Bapst, V., Sanchez-Gonzalez, A., Zambaldi, V., Malinowski, M., Tacchetti, A., Raposo, D., Santoro, A., Faulkner, R. and Gulcehre, C., Song, F., Ballard, A., Gilmer, J., Dahl, G., Vaswani, A., Allen, K., Nash, C., Langston, V., Dyer, C., Heess, N., Wierstra, D., Kohli, P., Botvinick, M., Vinyals, O., Li, Y., and Pascanu R.: Relational inductive biases, deep learning, and graph networks, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1806.01261, 4 June 2018.
Beucler, T., Rasp, S., Pritchard, M., and Gentine, P.: Achieving conservation of energy in neural network emulators for climate modeling, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1906.06622, 15 June 2019.
Beucler, T., Pritchard, M., Rasp, S., Ott, J., Baldi, P., and Gentine, P.: Enforcing analytic constraints in neural networks emulating physical systems, Phys. Rev. Lett., 126, 098302, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.098302. 2021.
Bhattacharya, K., Hosseini, B., Kovachki, N. B., and Stuart, A. M.: Model reduction and neural networks for parametric PDEs, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2005.03180, 7 May 2020.
Bi, K., Xie, L., Zhang, H., Chen, X., Gu, X., and Tian, Q.: Pangu-Weather: A 3D High-Resolution Model for Fast and Accurate Global Weather Forecast, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2211.02556, 3 November 2022.
Bihlo, A. and Popovych, R. O.: Physics-informed neural networks for the shallow-water equations on the sphere, J. Comput. Phys., 456, 111024, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2022.111024. 2022.
Bolton, T. and Zanna, L.: Applications of deep learning to ocean data inference and subgrid parameterization, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 11, 376–399, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001472, 2019.
Breiman, L.: Random forests, Mach. Learn., 45, 5–32, 2001.
Brenowitz, N. D. and Bretherton, C. S.: Prognostic validation of a neural network unified physics parameterization, Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 6289–6298, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL078510, 2018.
Brenowitz, N. D. and Bretherton, C. S.: Spatially extended tests of a neural network parametrization trained by coarse-graining, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 11, 2728–2744, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001711, 2019.
Brenowitz, N. D., Beucler, T., Pritchard, M., and Bretherton, C. S.: Interpreting and stabilizing machine-learning parametrizations of convection, J. Atmos. Sci., 77, 4357–4375, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-20-0082.1, 2020a.
Brenowitz, N. D., Henn, B., McGibbon, J., Clark, S. K., Kwa, A., Perkins, W. A., Watt-Meyer, O., and Bretherton, C. S.: Machine learning climate model dynamics: Offline versus online performance, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2011.03081, 5 November 2020b.
Brenowitz, N. D., Perkins, W. A., Nugent, J. M., Watt-Meyer, O., Clark, S. K., Kwa, A., Henn, B., McGibbon, J., and Bretherton, C. S.: Emulating Fast Processes in Climate Models., arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2211.10774, 19 November 2022.
Carranza-García, M., García-Gutiérrez, J., and Riquelme, J. C.: A framework for evaluating land use and land cover classification using convolutional neural networks, Remote Sens.-Basel, 11, 274, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11030274, 2019.
Chaney, N. W., Herman, J. D., Ek, M. B., and Wood, E. F.: Deriving global parameter estimates for the Noah land surface model using FLUXNET and machine learning, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 121, 13–218, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD024821, 2016.
Chantry, M., Christensen, H., Dueben, P., and Palmer, T.: Opportunities and challenges for machine learning in weather and climate modelling: hard, medium and soft AI, Philos. T. Roy. Soc. A, 379, 20200083, https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2020.0083, 2021a.
Chantry, M., Hatfield, S., Dueben, P., Polichtchouk, I., and Palmer, T.: Machine learning emulation of gravity wave drag in numerical weather forecasting, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 13, e2021MS002477, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021MS002477, 2021b.
Chase, R. J., Harrison, D. R., Burke, A., Lackmann, G. M., and McGovern, A.: A Machine Learning Tutorial for Operational Meteorology, Part I: Traditional Machine Learning, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2204.07492, 2022a.
Chase, R. J., Harrison, D. R., Lackmann, G., and McGovern, A.: A Machine Learning Tutorial for Operational Meteorology, Part II: Neural Networks and Deep Learning, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2211.00147, 2022b.
Chattopadhyay, A., Subel, A., and Hassanzadeh, P.: Data-driven super-parameterization using deep learning: Experimentation with multiscale lorenz 96 systems and transfer learning, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2020MS002084, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020MS002084, 2020.
Chevallier, F., Chéruy, F., Scott, N. A., and Chédin, A.: A neural network approach for a fast and accurate computation of a longwave radiative budget, J. Appl. Meteorol., 37, 1385–1397, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1998)037%3C1385:ANNAFA%3E2.0.CO;2, 1998.
Clare, M. C., Jamil, O., and Morcrette, C. J.: Combining distribution-based neural networks to predict weather forecast probabilities, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 147, 4337–4357, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.4180, 2021.
Cuomo, S., Di Cola, V. S., Giampaolo, F., Rozza, G., Raissi, M., and Piccialli, F.: Scientific Machine Learning through Physics-Informed Neural Networks: Where we are and What's next, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2201.05624, 14 January 2022.
Dagon, K., Sanderson, B. M., Fisher, R. A., and Lawrence, D. M.: A machine learning approach to emulation and biophysical parameter estimation with the Community Land Model, version 5, Adv. Stat. Clim. Meteorol. Oceanogr., 6, 223–244, https://doi.org/10.5194/ascmo-6-223-2020, 2020.
De Bézenac, E., Pajot, A., and Gallinari, P.: Towards a hybrid approach to physical process modeling, Technical report, https://dl4physicalsciences.github.io/files/nips_dlps_2017_9.pdf (last access: 3 November 2023), 2017.
de Witt, C. S., Tong, C., Zantedeschi, V., De Martini, D., Kalaitzis, F., Chantry, M., Watson-Parris, D., and Bilinski, P.: RainBench: towards global precipitation forecasting from satellite imagery, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2012.09670, 17 December 2020.
Deng, J., Dong, W., Socher, R., Li, L. J., Li, K., and Fei-Fei, L.: Imagenet: A large-scale hierarchical image database, IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Miami, FL, USA, 248–255, https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2009.5206848, 2009.
Digra, M., Dhir, R., and Sharma, N.: Land use land cover classification of remote sensing images based on the deep learning approaches: a statistical analysis and review, Arab. J. Geosci., 15, 1003, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-022-10246-8, 2022.
Dosovitskiy, A., Beyer, L., Kolesnikov, A., Weissenborn, D., Zhai, X., Unterthiner, T., Dehghani, M., Minderer, M., Heigold, G., Gelly, S. Uszkoreit, J., and Houlsby, N.: An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2010.11929, 22 October 2020.
Dueben, P. D. and Bauer, P.: Challenges and design choices for global weather and climate models based on machine learning, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 3999–4009, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3999-2018, 2018.
Dueben, P. D., Schultz, M. G., Chantry, M., Gagne, D. J., Hall, D. M., and McGovern, A.: Challenges and Benchmark Datasets for Machine Learning in the Atmospheric Sciences: Definition, Status, and Outlook, Artificial Intelligence for the Earth Systems, 1, e210002, https://doi.org/10.1175/AIES-D-21-0002.1, 2022.
ECMWF: Ifs documentation (cy45r1), https://www.ecmwf.int/en/publications/ifs-documentation (last access: 7 February 2023), 2018.
Eyring, V., Bony, S., Meehl, G. A., Senior, C. A., Stevens, B., Stouffer, R. J., and Taylor, K. E.: Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) experimental design and organization, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 1937–1958, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1937-2016, 2016.
Flora, M., Potvin, C., McGovern, A., and Handler, S.: Comparing Explanation Methods for Traditional Machine Learning Models Part 2: Quantifying Model Explainability Faithfulness and Improvements with Dimensionality Reduction, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2211.10378, 18 November 2022.
Friedman, J. H.: Greedy function approximation: a gradient boosting machine, Ann. Stat., 29 1189–1232, https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1013203451, 2001.
Fuhg, J. N., Kalogeris, I., Fau, A., and Bouklas, N.: Interval and fuzzy physics-informed neural networks for uncertain fields, Probabilist. Eng. Mech., 68, 103240, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.probengmech.2022.103240, 2022.
Gagne, D. J., McCandless, T., Kosovic, B., DeCastro, A., Loft, R., Haupt, S. E., and Yang, B.: Machine learning parameterization of the surface layer: bridging the observation-modeling gap, in: AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 2019, IN44A-04, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019AGUFMIN44A..04G/abstract (last access: 3 November 2023), 2019.
Gagne, D. J., Chen, C. C., and Gettelman, A.: Emulation of bin Microphysical Processes with machine learning, in: 100th American Meteorological Society Annual Meeting, AMS, https://ams.confex.com/ams/2020Annual/webprogram/Paper368156.html (last access: 3 November 2023), 2020a.
Gagne, D. J., Christensen, H. M., Subramanian, A. C., and Monahan, A. H.: Machine learning for stochastic parameterization: Generative adversarial networks in the Lorenz'96 model, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS001896, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001896, 2020b.
Garg, S., Rasp, S., and Thuerey, N.: WeatherBench Probability: A benchmark dataset for probabilistic medium-range weather forecasting along with deep learning baseline models, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2205.00865, 2 May 2022.
George, T., Gupta, A., and Sarin, V.: A recommendation system for preconditioned iterative solvers, Eighth IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, Pisa, Italy, 803–808, https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDM.2008.105, 2008.
Gettelman, A., Gagne, D. J., Chen, C. C., Christensen, M. W., Lebo, Z. J., Morrison, H., and Gantos, G.: Machine learning the warm rain process, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 13, e2020MS002268, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020MS002268, 2021.
Goodfellow, I., Yoshua B., and Aaron C.: Deep learning, MIT press, ISBN 9780262035613, 2016.
Goodfellow, I., Pouget-Abadie, J., Mirza, M., Xu, B., Warde-Farley, D., Ozair, S., Courville, A., and Bengio, Y.: Generative adversarial networks, Commun. Acm., 63, 139–144, https://doi.org/10.1145/3422622, 2020.
Grigo, C. and Koutsourelakis, P. S.: A physics-aware, probabilistic machine learning framework for coarse-graining high-dimensional systems in the Small Data regime, J. Comput. Phys., 397, 108842, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2019.05.053, 2019.
Gurvan, M., Bourdallé-Badie, R., Chanut, J., Clementi, E., Coward, A., Ethé, C., Iovino, D., Lea, D., Lévy, C., Lovato, T., Martin, N., Masson, S., Mocavero, S., Rousset, C., Storkey, D., Vancoppenolle, M., Müeller, S., Nurser, G., Bell, M., and Samson, G.: NEMO ocean engine, Institut Pierre-Simon Laplace (IPSL), Zenodo, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1464816, 2019.
Ham, Y. G., Kim, J. H., and Luo, J. J.: Deep learning for multi-year ENSO forecasts, Nature, 573, 568–572, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1559-7, 2019.
Ham, Y. G., Kim, J. H., Kim, E. S., and On, K. W.: Unified deep learning model for El Niño/Southern Oscillation forecasts by incorporating seasonality in climate data, Sci. Bull., 66, 1358–1366, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scib.2021.03.009, 2021.
Han, Y., Zhang, G. J., Huang, X., and Wang, Y.: A moist physics parameterization based on deep learning, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2020MS002076, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020MS002076, 2020.
Harder, P., Watson-Parris, D., Stier, P., Strassel, D., Gauger, N. R., and Keuper, J.: Physics-informed learning of aerosol microphysics, Environ. Data Sci., 1, e20, https://doi.org/10.1017/eds.2022.22, 2022.
Harris, L., Chen, X., Putman, W., Zhou, L., and Chen, J. H.: A scientific description of the GFDL finite-volume cubed-sphere dynamical core, NOAA technical memorandum OAR GFDL, https://doi.org/10.25923/6nhs-5897, 2021.
Hastie, T., Tibshirani, R., Friedman, J. H., and Friedman, J. H.: The elements of statistical learning: data mining, inference, and prediction, New York Springer, 2, 758 pp., https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-21606-5, 2009.
He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S., and Sun, J.: Deep residual learning for image recognition, Proc. CVPR IEEE, 770–778, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1512.03385, 2016.
He, X., Liu, S., Xu, T., Yu, K., Gentine, P., Zhang, Z., Xu, Z., Jiao, D., and Wu, D.: Improving predictions of evapotranspiration by integrating multi-source observations and land surface model, Agr. Water Manage., 272, 107827, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2022.107827, 2022.
Hewamalage, H., Ackermann, K., and Bergmeir, C.: Forecast Evaluation for Data Scientists: Common Pitfalls and Best Practices, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2203.10716, 21 March 2022.
Hochreiter, S. and Schmidhuber, J.: LSTM can solve hard long time lag problems, Adv. Neur. In., 9, https://papers.nips.cc/paper_files/paper/1996/hash/a4d2f0d23dcc84ce983ff9157f8b7f88-Abstract.html (last access: 3 November 2023), 1996.
Holloway, A. and Chen, T. Y.: Neural networks for predicting the behavior of preconditioned iterative solvers, in: International Conference on Computational Science,Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 302–309, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-72584-8_39, 2007.
Hornik, K., Stinchcombe, M., and White, H.: Multilayer feedforward networks are universal approximators, Neural Networks, 2, 359–366, https://doi.org/10.1016/0893-6080(89)90020-8, 1989.
Horvat, C. and Roach, L. A.: WIFF1.0: a hybrid machine-learning-based parameterization of wave-induced sea ice floe fracture, Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 803–814, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-803-2022, 2022.
Hsieh, W. W.: Introduction to Environmental Data Science, Cambridge University Press, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781107588493, 2023.
Hu, Y., Chen, L., Wang, Z., and Li, H.: SwinVRNN: A Data-Driven Ensemble Forecasting Model via Learned Distribution Perturbation, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 15, e2022MS003211, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022MS003211, 2023.
Huang, Z., England, M., Davenport, J. H., and Paulson, L. C.: Using machine learning to decide when to precondition cylindrical algebraic decomposition with Groebner bases, 18th International Symposium on Symbolic and Numeric Algorithms for Scientific Computing (SYNASC), Timisoara, Romania, 45–52, https://doi.org/10.1109/SYNASC.2016.020, 2016.
Johnson, S. J., Stockdale, T. N., Ferranti, L., Balmaseda, M. A., Molteni, F., Magnusson, L., Tietsche, S., Decremer, D., Weisheimer, A., Balsamo, G., Keeley, S. P. E., Mogensen, K., Zuo, H., and Monge-Sanz, B. M.: SEAS5: the new ECMWF seasonal forecast system, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 1087–1117, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-1087-2019, 2019.
Kapp-Schwoerer, L., Graubner, A., Kim, S., and Kashinath, K.: Spatio-temporal segmentation and tracking of weather patterns with light-weight Neural Networks, https://ai4earthscience.github.io/neurips-2020-workshop/papers/ai4earth_neurips_2020_55.pdf (last access: 3 November 2023), 2020.
Karpatne, A., Atluri, G., Faghmous, J. H., Steinbach, M., Banerjee, A., Ganguly, A., Shekhar, S., Samatova, N., and Kumar, V.: Theory-guided data science: A new paradigm for scientific discovery from data, IEEE T. Knowl. Data En., 29, 2318–2331, https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2017.2720168, 2017.
Karunasinghe, D. S. and Liong, S. Y.: Chaotic time series prediction with a global model: Artificial neural network, J. Hydrol., 323, 92–105, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2005.07.048, 2006.
Kashinath, K., Mustafa, M., Albert, A., Wu, J. L., Jiang, C., Esmaeilzadeh, S., Azizzadenesheli, K., Wang, R., Chattopadhyay, A., Singh, A., Manepalli, A., Chirila, D., Yu, R., Walters, R., White, B., Xiao, H., Tchelepi, H. A., Marcus, P., Anandkumar, A., Hassanzadeh, P., and Prabhat, N.: Physics-informed machine learning: case studies for weather and climate modelling, Philos. T. Roy. Soc. A, 379, 20200093, https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2020.0093, 2021.
Keisler, R.: Forecasting Global Weather with Graph Neural Networks, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2202.07575, 15 February 2022.
Kelotra, A. and Pandey, P.: Stock market prediction using optimized deep-convlstm model, Big Data, 8, 5–24, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2202.07575, 2022.
Kim, J., Kwon, M., Kim, S. D., Kug, J. S., Ryu, J. G., and Kim, J.: Spatiotemporal neural network with attention mechanism for El Niño forecasts, Sci. Rep.-UK, 12, 1–15, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-10839-z, 2022.
Kipf, T. N. and Welling, M.: Semi-supervised classification with graph convolutional networks, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1609.02907, 9 September 2016.
Kochkov, D., Smith, J. A., Alieva, A., Wang, Q., Brenner, M. P., and Hoyer, S.: Machine learning–accelerated computational fluid dynamics, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 118, e2101784118, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2101784118, 2021.
Krasnopolsky, V. M., Chalikov, D. V., and Tolman, H. L.: A neural network technique to improve computational efficiency of numerical oceanic models, Ocean Model., 4, 363–383, https://doi.org/10.1016/S1463-5003(02)00010-0, 2002.
Krasnopolsky, V. M., Fox-Rabinovitz, M. S., and Chalikov, D. V.: New approach to calculation of atmospheric model physics: Accurate and fast neural network emulation of longwave radiation in a climate model, Mon. Weather Rev., 133, 1370–1383, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR2923.1, 2005.
Krasnopolsky, V. M., Fox-Rabinovitz, M. S., and Belochitski, A. A.: Using ensemble of neural networks to learn stochastic convection parameterizations for climate and numerical weather prediction models from data simulated by a cloud resolving model, Advances in Artificial Neural Systems, 2013, p. 5, https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/485913, 2013.
Kuefler, E. and Chen, T. Y.: On using reinforcement learning to solve sparse linear systems, in: International Conference on Computational Science, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 955–964, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-69384-0_100, 2008.
Ladický, L. U., Jeong, S., Solenthaler, B., Pollefeys, M., and Gross, M.: Data-driven fluid simulations using regression forests, ACM T. Graphic., 34, 1–9, https://doi.org/10.1145/2816795.2818129, 2015.
Lam, R., Sanchez-Gonzalez, A., Willson, M., Wirnsberger, P., Fortunato, M., Pritzel, A., Ravuri, S., Ewalds, T., Alet, F., Eaton-Rosen, Z. Hu, W., Merose, A., Hoyer, S., Holland, G., Vinyals, O., Stott, J., Pritzel, A., Mohamed, S., and Battaglia, P.: GraphCast: Learning skillful medium-range global weather forecasting, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2212.12794, 24 December 2022.
Lanthaler, S., Mishra, S., and Karniadakis, G. E.: Error estimates for deeponets: A deep learning framework in infinite dimensions, T. Math. Appl., 6, tnac001, https://doi.org/10.1093/imatrm/tnac001, 2022.
LeCun, Y., Bottou, L., Bengio, Y., and Haffner, P.: Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition, P. IEEE, 86, 2278–2324, https://doi.org/10.1109/5.726791, 1998.
Leufen, L. H. and Schädler, G.: Calculating the turbulent fluxes in the atmospheric surface layer with neural networks, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 2033–2047, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2033-2019, 2019.
Li, Z., Kovachki, N., Azizzadenesheli, K., Liu, B., Stuart, A., Bhattacharya, K., and Anandkumar, A.: Multipole graph neural operator for parametric partial differential equations, Adv. Neur. In., 33, 6755–6766, 2020a.
Li, Z., Kovachki, N., Azizzadenesheli, K., Liu, B., Bhattacharya, K., Stuart, A., and Anandkumar, A.: Neural operator: Graph kernel network for partial differential equations, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2003.03485, 7 March 2020b.
Li, Z., Kovachki, N., Azizzadenesheli, K., Liu, B., Bhattacharya, K., Stuart, A., and Anandkumar, A.: Fourier neural operator for parametric partial differential equations, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2010.08895, 18 October 2020c.
Lopez-Gomez, I., McGovern, A., Agrawal, S., and Hickey, J.: Global extreme heat forecasting using neural weather models, Artificial Intelligence for the Earth Systems, 2, e220035, https://doi.org/10.1175/AIES-D-22-0035.1, 2023.
Lorenz, E. N.: Predictability: A problem partly solved, in Proceedings of Seminar on Predictability, 4–8, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511617652.004, 1996.
Lu, L., Jin, P., and Karniadakis, G. E.: Deeponet: Learning nonlinear operators for identifying differential equations based on the universal approximation theorem of operators, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1910.03193, 8 October 2019.
Lundberg, S. and Lee, S.: A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions, Adv. Neur. In., 30, 4768–4777, 2017.
McCulloch, W. S. and Pitts, W.: A logical calculus of the ideas immanent in nervous activity, B. Math. Biophys., 5, 115–133, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02478259, 1943.
McGovern, A., Lagerquist, R., Gagne, D. J., Jergensen, G. E., Elmore, K. L., Homeyer, C. R., and Smith, T.: Making the black box more transparent: Understanding the physical implications of machine learning, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 100, 2175–2199, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-18-0195.1, 2019.
Meyer, D., Hogan, R. J., Dueben, P. D., and Mason, S. L.: Machine learning emulation of 3D cloud radiative effects, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 14, e2021MS002550, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021MS002550, 2022.
Moishin, M., Deo, R. C., Prasad, R., Raj, N., and Abdulla, S.: Designing deep-based learning flood forecast model with ConvLSTM hybrid algorithm, IEEE Access, 9, 50982–50993, https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3065939, 2021.
Molina, M. J., O’Brien, T. A., Anderson, G., Ashfaq, M., Bennett, K. E., Collins, W. D., Dagon, K., Restrepo, J. M., and Ullrich, P. A.: A Review of Recent and Emerging Machine Learning Applications for Climate Variability and Weather Phenomena, Artificial Intelligence for the Earth Systems, 2, 1–46, https://doi.org/10.1175/AIES-D-22-0086.1, 2023.
Mooers, G., Pritchard, M., Beucler, T., Ott, J., Yacalis, G., Baldi, P., and Gentine, P.: Assessing the Potential of Deep Learning for Emulating Cloud Superparameterization in Climate Models With Real-Geography Boundary Conditions, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 13, e2020MS002385, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020MS002385, 2021.
Mudigonda, M., Kim, S., Mahesh, A., Kahou, S., Kashinath, K., Williams, D., Michalski, V., O’Brien, T., and Prabhat, M.: Segmenting and tracking extreme climate events using neural networks, in: Deep Learning for Physical Sciences (DLPS) Workshop, held with NIPS Conference, https://dl4physicalsciences.github.io/files/nips_dlps_2017_20.pdf (last access: 3 November 2023), 2017.
Neale, R. B., Chen, C. C., Gettelman, A., Lauritzen, P. H., Park, S., Williamson, D. L., Conley, A. J., Garcia, R., Kinnison, D., Lamarque, J. F., Marsh, D., Mills, M., Smith, A. K., Tilmes, S., Vitt, F., Morrison, H., Cameron-Smith, P., Iacono, M. J., Easter, R. C., Ghan, S. J., Liu, X., Rasch, P. J., and Taylor, M. A.: Description of the NCAR community atmosphere model (CAM 5.0), NCAR technical note, 3, https://www2.cesm.ucar.edu/models/cesm1.0/cam/docs/description/cam5_desc.pdf (last access: 3 November 2023), 2012.
Nelsen, N. H. and Stuart, A. M.: The random feature model for input-output maps between banach spaces, SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 43, A3212–A3243, https://doi.org/10.1137/20M133957X, 2021.
Nguyen, T., Brandstetter, J., Kapoor, A., Gupta, J. K., and Grover, A.: ClimaX: A foundation model for weather and climate, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2301.10343, 24 January 2023.
Nielsen, A. H., Iosifidis, A., and Karstoft, H.: Forecasting large-scale circulation regimes using deformable convolutional neural networks and global spatiotemporal climate data, Sci. Rep.-UK, 12, 1–12, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1995)052%3C1237:WRRAQS%3E2.0.CO;2, 2022.
O'Brien, T. A., Risser, M. D., Loring, B., Elbashandy, A. A., Krishnan, H., Johnson, J., Patricola, C. M., O'Brien, J. P., Mahesh, A., Prabhat, Arriaga Ramirez, S., Rhoades, A. M., Charn, A., Inda Díaz, H., and Collins, W. D.: Detection of atmospheric rivers with inline uncertainty quantification: TECA-BARD v1.0.1, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 6131–6148, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-6131-2020, 2020.
O'Gorman, P. A. and Dwyer, J. G.: Using machine learning to parameterize moist convection: Potential for modeling of climate, climate change, and extreme events, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 10, 2548–2563, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001351, 2018.
O'Leary, J., Paulson, J. A., and Mesbah, A.: Stochastic physics-informed neural ordinary differential equations, J. Comput. Phys., 468, 111466, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2022.111466, 2022.
Ott, J., Pritchard, M., Best, N., Linstead, E., Curcic, M., and Baldi, P.: A Fortran-Keras deep learning bridge for scientific computing, Sci. Programm., 2020, 1–13, https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/8888811, 2020.
Pal, S. and Sharma, P.: A review of machine learning applications in land surface modeling, Earth, 2, 174–190, https://doi.org/10.3390/earth2010011, 2021.
Pan, S., Pan, N., Tian, H., Friedlingstein, P., Sitch, S., Shi, H., Arora, V. K., Haverd, V., Jain, A. K., Kato, E., Lienert, S., Lombardozzi, D., Nabel, J. E. M. S., Ottlé, C., Poulter, B., Zaehle, S., and Running, S. W.: Evaluation of global terrestrial evapotranspiration using state-of-the-art approaches in remote sensing, machine learning and land surface modeling, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 1485–1509, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-1485-2020, 2020.
Patel, R. G., Trask, N. A., Wood, M. A., and Cyr, E. C.: A physics-informed operator regression framework for extracting data-driven continuum models, Comput. Method Appl. M., 373, 113500, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2020.113500, 2021.
Pathak, J., Subramanian, S., Harrington, P., Raja, S., Chattopadhyay, A., Mardani, M., Kurth, T., Hall, D., Li, Z., Azizzadenesheli, K. and Hassanzadeh, P., Kashinath, K., and Anandkumar, A.: Fourcastnet: A global data-driven high-resolution weather model using adaptive fourier neural operators, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2202.11214, 22 February 2022.
Peairs, L. and Chen, T. Y.: Using reinforcement learning to vary the m in GMRES (m), Procedia Comput. Sci., 4, 2257–2266, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2011.04.246, 2011.
Pelissier, C., Frame, J., and Nearing, G.: Combining parametric land surface models with machine learning, Int. Geosci. Remote. S., 2020, 3668–3671, https://doi.org/10.1109/IGARSS39084.2020.9324607, 2020.
Pincus, R., Mlawer, E. J., and Delamere, J. S.: Balancing accuracy, efficiency, and flexibility in radiation calculations for dynamical models, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 11, 3074–3089, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001621, 2019.
Prabhat, Kashinath, K., Mudigonda, M., Kim, S., Kapp-Schwoerer, L., Graubner, A., Karaismailoglu, E., von Kleist, L., Kurth, T., Greiner, A., Mahesh, A., Yang, K., Lewis, C., Chen, J., Lou, A., Chandran, S., Toms, B., Chapman, W., Dagon, K., Shields, C. A., O'Brien, T., Wehner, M., and Collins, W.: ClimateNet: an expert-labeled open dataset and deep learning architecture for enabling high-precision analyses of extreme weather, Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 107–124, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-107-2021, 2021.
Psaros, A. F., Meng, X., Zou, Z., Guo, L., and Karniadakis, G. E.: Uncertainty quantification in scientific machine learning: Methods, metrics, and comparisons, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2201.07766, 19 January 2022.
Rasp, S.: Coupled online learning as a way to tackle instabilities and biases in neural network parameterizations: general algorithms and Lorenz 96 case study (v1.0), Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 2185–2196, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2185-2020, 2020.
Rasp, S., Dueben, P. D., Scher, S., Weyn, J. A., Mouatadid, S., and Thuerey, N.: WeatherBench: a benchmark data set for data-driven weather forecasting, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2020MS002203, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020MS002203, 2020.
Rasp, S., Pritchard, M. S., and Gentine, P.: Deep learning to represent subgrid processes in climate models, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 115, 9684–9689, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1810286115, 2018.
Rasp, S. and Thuerey, N.: Data-driven medium-range weather prediction with a resnet pretrained on climate simulations: A new model for weatherbench, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 13, e2020MS002405, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020MS002405, 2021.
Ravuri, S., Lenc, K., Willson, M., Kangin, D., Lam, R., Mirowski, P., Fitzsimons, M., Athanassiadou, M., Kashem, S., Madge, S. Prudden, R., Mandhane, A., Clark, A., Brock, A., Simonyan, K., Hadsell, R., Robinson, N., Clancy, E., Arribas, A., and Mohamed, S.: Skilful precipitation nowcasting using deep generative models of radar, Nature, 597, 672–677, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03854-z, 2021.
Rizzuti, G., Siahkoohi, A., and Herrmann, F. J.: Learned iterative solvers for the Helmholtz equation, in: 81st EAGE Conference and Exhibition 2019, European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers, Vol. 2019, 1–5, https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.201901542, 2019.
Ronneberger, O., Fischer, P., and Brox, T.: U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation, in: International Conference on Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention, Springer, Cham, 234–241, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24574-4_28, 2015.
Rosier, S. H. R., Bull, C. Y. S., Woo, W. L., and Gudmundsson, G. H.: Predicting ocean-induced ice-shelf melt rates using deep learning, The Cryosphere, 17, 499–518, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-499-2023, 2023.
Ross, A., Li, Z., Perezhogin, P., Fernandez-Granda, C., and Zanna, L.: Benchmarking of machine learning ocean subgrid parameterizations in an idealized model, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 15, e2022MS003258, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022MS003258, 2023.
Rupe, A., Kashinath, K., Kumar, N., and Crutchfield, J. P.: Physics-Informed Representation Learning for Emergent Organization in Complex Dynamical Systems, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2304.12586, 25 April 2023.
Russell, S. and Norvig, P.: Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach, 4th Global Edn., Pearson Education, ISBN 0-13-461099-7, 2021.
Samek, W., Montavon, G., Lapuschkin, S., Anders, C. J., and Müller, K. R.: Explaining deep neural networks and beyond: A review of methods and applications, P. IEEE, 109, 247–278, https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2021.3060483, 2021.
Sawada, Y.: Machine learning accelerates parameter optimization and uncertainty assessment of a land surface model, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 125, e2020JD032688, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD032688, 2020.
Scarselli, F., Gori, M., Tsoi, A. C., Hagenbuchner, M., and Monfardini, G.: The graph neural network model, IEEE T. Neural Net., 20, 61–80, https://doi.org/10.1109/TNN.2008.2005605, 2008.
Scher, S.: Toward data-driven weather and climate forecasting: Approximating a simple general circulation model with deep learning, Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 12–616, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL080704, 2018.
Scher, S. and Messori, G.: Weather and climate forecasting with neural networks: using general circulation models (GCMs) with different complexity as a study ground, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 2797–2809, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2797-2019, 2019.
Shi, X., Chen, Z., Wang, H., Yeung, D. Y., Wong, W. K., and Woo, W. C.: Convolutional LSTM network: A machine learning approach for precipitation nowcasting, Adv. Neur. In., 28, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1506.04214, 2015.
Taylor, J. and Feng, M.: A Deep Learning Model for Forecasting Global Monthly Mean Sea Surface Temperature Anomalies, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2202.09967, 21 February 2022.
Tompson, J., Schlachter, K., Sprechmann, P., and Perlin, K.: Accelerating eulerian fluid simulation with convolutional networks, in: International Conference on Machine Learning, 3424–3433, https://proceedings.mlr.press/v70/tompson17a.html (last access: 3 November 2023), PMLR, 2017.
Toms, B. A., Barnes, E. A., and Ebert-Uphoff, I.: Physically interpretable neural networks for the geosciences: Applications to earth system variability, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS002002, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS002002, 2020.
Turing, A. M.: Computing Machinery and Intelligence, Mind, Volume LIX, 236, 433–460, https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/LIX.236.433, 1950.
Ukkonen, P. and Mäkelä, A.: Evaluation of machine learning classifiers for predicting deep convection, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 11, 1784–1802, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001561, 2019.
Ukkonen, P., Pincus, R., Hogan, R. J., Pagh Nielsen, K., and Kaas, E.: Accelerating radiation computations for dynamical models with targeted machine learning and code optimization, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2020MS002226, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020MS002226, 2020.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO]: Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence, UNESCO programme and meeting document code SHS/BIO/REC-AIETHICS/2021, https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000380455 (last access: 3 November 2023), 2021.
Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A.N., Kaiser, Ł. and Polosukhin, I.: Attention is all you need, Adv. Neur. In., 30, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1706.03762, 2017.
Virnodkar, S. S., Pachghare, V. K., Patil, V. C., and Jha, S. K.: Remote sensing and machine learning for crop water stress determination in various crops: a critical review, Precis. Agric., 21, 1121–1155, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11119-020-09711-9, 2020.
Vlachas, P. R., Byeon, W., Wan, Z. Y., Sapsis, T. P., and Koumoutsakos, P.: Data-driven forecasting of high-dimensional chaotic systems with long short-term memory networks, P. Roy. Soc. A, 474, 20170844, https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2017.0844, 2018.
Walters, D., Boutle, I., Brooks, M., Melvin, T., Stratton, R., Vosper, S., Wells, H., Williams, K., Wood, N., Allen, T., Bushell, A., Copsey, D., Earnshaw, P., Edwards, J., Gross, M., Hardiman, S., Harris, C., Heming, J., Klingaman, N., Levine, R., Manners, J., Martin, G., Milton, S., Mittermaier, M., Morcrette, C., Riddick, T., Roberts, M., Sanchez, C., Selwood, P., Stirling, A., Smith, C., Suri, D., Tennant, W., Vidale, P. L., Wilkinson, J., Willett, M., Woolnough, S., and Xavier, P.: The Met Office Unified Model Global Atmosphere 6.0/6.1 and JULES Global Land 6.0/6.1 configurations, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 1487–1520, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-1487-2017, 2017.
Wang, S., Wang, H., and Perdikaris, P.: Learning the solution operator of parametric partial differential equations with physics-informed DeepONets, Sci. Adv., 7, eabi8605, https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abi8605, 2021.
Wang, X., Han, Y., Xue, W., Yang, G., and Zhang, G. J.: Stable climate simulations using a realistic general circulation model with neural network parameterizations for atmospheric moist physics and radiation processes, Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 3923–3940, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-3923-2022, 2022a.
Wang, S., Sankaran, S., and Perdikaris, P.: Respecting causality is all you need for training physics-informed neural networks, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2203.07404, 2022b.
Watson, P. A.: Machine learning applications for weather and climate need greater focus on extremes, Environ. Res. Lett., 17, 111004, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac9d4e, 2022.
Watt‐Meyer, O., Brenowitz, N. D., Clark, S. K., Henn, B., Kwa, A., McGibbon, J., Perkins, W. A., and Bretherton, C. S.: Correcting weather and climate models by machine learning nudged historical simulations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 48, e2021GL092555, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021GL092555, 2021.
Watson-Parris, D.: Machine learning for weather and climate are worlds apart, Philos. T. Roy. Soc. A, 379, 20200098, https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2020.0098, 2021.
Watson‐Parris, D., Rao, Y., Olivié, D., Seland, Ø., Nowack, P., Camps‐Valls, G., Stier, P., Bouabid, S., Dewey, M., Fons, E. and Gonzalez, J., Harder, P., Jeggle, K., Lenhardt, J., Manshausen, P., Novitasari, M., Ricard, L., and Roesch, C.: ClimateBench v1. 0: A Benchmark for Data-Driven Climate Projections, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 14, e2021MS002954, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021MS002954, 2022.
Werbos, P.: Beyond regression: new tools for prediction and analysis in the behavioral sciences, Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University, https://cir.nii.ac.jp/crid/1571135649638605440 (last access: 3 November 2023), 1974.
Werbos, P. J.: Backpropagation through time: what it does and how to do it, P. IEEE, 78, 1550–1560, https://doi.org/10.1109/5.58337, 1990.
Weyn, J. A., Durran, D. R., and Caruana, R.: Can machines learn to predict weather? Using deep learning to predict gridded 500-hPa geopotential height from historical weather data, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 11, 2680–2693, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001705, 2019.
Weyn, J. A., Durran, D. R., and Caruana, R.: Improving data-driven global weather prediction using deep convolutional neural networks on a cubed sphere, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2020MS002109, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020MS002109, 2020.
Weyn, J. A., Durran, D. R., Caruana, R., and Cresswell-Clay, N.: Sub-seasonal forecasting with a large ensemble of deep-learning weather prediction models, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 13, 7, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021MS002502, 2021.
Wikner, A., Pathak, J., Hunt, B., Girvan, M., Arcomano, T., Szunyogh, I., Pomerance, A., and Ott, E.: Combining machine learning with knowledge-based modeling for scalable forecasting and subgrid-scale closure of large, complex, spatiotemporal systems, Chaos, 30, 053111, https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0005541, 2020.
Wu, K. and Xiu, D.: Data-driven deep learning of partial differential equations in modal space, J. Comput. Phys., 408, 109307, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2020.109307, 2020.
Yamada, K., Katagiri, T., Takizawa, H., Minami, K., Yokokawa, M., Nagai, T., and Ogino, M.: Preconditioner auto-tuning using deep learning for sparse iterative algorithms, in: 2018 Sixth International Symposium on Computing and Networking Workshops (CANDARW), 257–262, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2020.109307, 2018.
Yang, C., Yang, X., and Xiao, X.: Data-driven projection method in fluid simulation, Comput. Animat. Virt. W., 27, 415–424, https://doi.org/10.1002/cav.1695, 2016.
Yeo, K., Grullon, D. E., Sun, F. K., Boning, D. S., and Kalagnanam, J. R.: Variational inference formulation for a model-free simulation of a dynamical system with unknown parameters by a recurrent neural network, SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 43, A1305–A1335, https://doi.org/10.1137/20M1323151, 2021.
Yuan, Z., Zhou, X., and Yang, T.: Hetero-convlstm: A deep learning approach to traffic accident prediction on heterogeneous spatio-temporal data, in: Proceedings of the 24th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, 984–992, https://doi.org/10.1145/3219819.3219922, 2018.
Yuval, J. and O'Gorman, P. A.: Stable machine-learning parameterization of subgrid processes for climate modeling at a range of resolutions, Nat. Commun., 11, 1–10, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-17142-3, 2020.
Yuval, J., O'Gorman, P. A., and Hill, C. N.: Use of neural networks for stable, accurate and physically consistent parameterization of subgrid atmospheric processes with good performance at reduced precision, Geophys. Res. Lett., 48, e2020GL091363, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL091363, 2021.
Zagoruyko, S., and Komodakis, N.: Wide residual networks, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1605.07146, 23 May 2016.
Zanna, L. and Bolton, T.: Data-driven equation discovery of ocean mesoscale closures, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47, e2020GL088376, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL088376, 2020.
Zhang, N., Zhou, X., Kang, M., Hu, B. G., Heuvelink, E., and Marcelis, L. F.: Machine learning versus crop growth models: an ally, not a rival, AOB Plants, 15, plac061, https://doi.org/10.1093/aobpla/plac061, 2023.
Zhao, W. L., Gentine, P., Reichstein, M., Zhang, Y., Zhou, S., Wen, Y., Lin, C., Li, X., and Qiu, G. Y.: Physics-constrained machine learning of evapotranspiration, Geophys. Res. Lett., 46, 14496–14507, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL085291, 2019.
Zhong, X., Ma, Z., Yao, Y., Xu, L., Wu, Y., and Wang, Z.: WRF–ML v1.0: a bridge between WRF v4.3 and machine learning parameterizations and its application to atmospheric radiative transfer, Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 199–209, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-199-2023, 2023.
Zhou, L., Lin, S. J., Chen, J. H., Harris, L. M., Chen, X., and Rees, S. L.: Toward convective-scale prediction within the next generation global prediction system, B Am. Meteorol. Soc., 100, 1225–1243, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-17-0246.1, 2019.
Executive editor
Machine Learning is a rapidly expanding technique in the field of weather and climate modelling. This paper takes stock of the state of the field at the present time, and will be invaluable to participants across the field and beyond who wish to understand the impact of Machine Learning on the field, its limitations, and current scope.
Machine Learning is a rapidly expanding technique in the field of weather and climate modelling....
Short summary
Machine learning (ML) is an increasingly popular tool in the field of weather and climate modelling. While ML has been used in this space for a long time, it is only recently that ML approaches have become competitive with more traditional methods. In this review, we have summarized the use of ML in weather and climate modelling over time; provided an overview of key ML concepts, methodologies, and terms; and suggested promising avenues for further research.
Machine learning (ML) is an increasingly popular tool in the field of weather and climate...
