Title: Uncertainty quantification techniques for data-driven space weather modeling: thermospheric density application
Abstract
Machine learning (ML) has been applied to space weather problems with increasing frequency in recent years, driven by an influx of in-situ measurements and a desire to improve modeling and forecasting capabilities throughout the field. Space weather originates from solar perturbations and is comprised of the resulting complex variations they cause within the numerous systems between the Sun and Earth. These systems are often tightly coupled and not well understood. This creates a need for skillful models with knowledge about the confidence of their predictions. One example of such a dynamical system highly impacted by space weather is the thermosphere, the neutral region of Earth’s upper atmosphere. Our inability to forecast it has severe repercussions in the context of satellite drag and computation of probability of collision between two space objects in low Earth orbit (LEO) for decision making in space operations. Even with (assumed) perfect forecast of model drivers, our incomplete knowledge of the system results in often inaccurate thermospheric neutral mass density predictions. Continuing efforts are being made to improve model accuracy, but density models rarely provide estimates of confidence in predictions. In this work, we propose two techniques to develop nonlinear ML regression models to predict more »
thermospheric density while providing robust and reliable uncertainty estimates: Monte Carlo (MC) dropout and direct prediction of the probability distribution, both using the negative logarithm of predictive density (NLPD) loss function. We show the performance capabilities for models trained on both local and global datasets. We show that the NLPD loss provides similar results for both techniques but the direct probability distribution prediction method has a much lower computational cost. For the global model regressed on the Space Environment Technologies High Accuracy Satellite Drag Model (HASDM) density database, we achieve errors of approximately 11% on independent test data with well-calibrated uncertainty estimates. Using an in-situ CHAllenging Minisatellite Payload (CHAMP) density dataset, models developed using both techniques provide test error on the order of 13%. The CHAMP models—on validation and test data—are within 2% of perfect calibration for the twenty prediction intervals tested. We show that this model can also be used to obtain global density predictions with uncertainties at a given epoch.
Bruinsma, Sean; Boniface, Claude; Sutton, Eric K.; Fedrizzi, Mariangel(
, Journal of Space Weather and Space Climate)
The specification and prediction of density fluctuations in the thermosphere, especially during geomagnetic storms, is a key challenge for space weather observations and modeling. It is of great operational importance for tracking objects orbiting in near-Earth space. For low-Earth orbit, variations in neutral density represent the most important uncertainty for propagation and prediction of satellite orbits. An international conference in 2018 conducted under the auspices of the NASA Community Coordinated Modeling Center (CCMC) included a workshop on neutral density modeling, using both empirical and numerical methods, and resulted in the organization of an initial effort of model comparison and evaluation. Here, we present an updated metric for model assessment under geomagnetic storm conditions by dividing a storm in four phases with respect to the time of minimum Dst and then calculating the mean density ratios and standard deviations and correlations. Comparisons between three empirical (NRLMSISE-00, JB2008 and DTM2013) and two first-principles models (TIE-GCM and CTIPe) and neutral density data sets that include measurements by the CHAMP, GRACE, and GOCE satellites for 13 storms are presented. The models all show reduced performance during storms, notably much increased standard deviations, but DTM2013, JB2008 and CTIPe did not on average reveal a significantmore »bias in the four phases of our metric. DTM2013 and TIE-GCM driven with the Weimer model achieved the best results taking the entire storm event into account, while NRLMSISE-00 systematically and significantly underestimates the storm densities. Numerical models are still catching up to empirical methods on a statistical basis, but as their drivers become more accurate and they become available at higher resolutions, they will surpass them in the foreseeable future.« less
Paul, S.N.; Sheridan, L.; Mehta, P.; Huzurbazar, S.(
, American Astronomical Society meeting)
The rapidly increasing congestion in the low Earth environment makes the modeling of uncertainty in atmospheric drag force a critical task, affecting space situational awareness (SSA) activities like the probability of collision estimation. A key element in atmospheric drag modeling is the assessment of uncertainty in the atmospheric drag coefficient estimate. While atmospheric drag coefficients for space objects with known characteristics can be computed numerically, they suffer from large computational costs for practical applications. In this work, we use cost-effective data-driven stochastic methods for modeling the drag coefficients of objects in the low Earth orbit (LEO) region. The training data is generated using the numerical Test Particle Monte Carlo (TPMC) method. TPMC is simulated with Cercignani–Lampis–Lord (CLL) gas-surface interaction (GSI) model. Mehta et al. [1] use a Gaussian process regression (GPR) model to predict satellite drag coefficient, but the authors did not estimate the predictive uncertainty. The first part of this research extends the work by Mehta et al. [1] by fitting a GPR model to the training data and performing predictive uncertainty estimation. The results of the Gaussian fit are then compared against a deep neural network (DNN) model aided by the Monte Carlo dropout approach. To the bestmore »of our knowledge, this is the first study to use the aforementioned stochastic deep learning algorithm to perform predictive uncertainty estimation of the estimated satellite drag coefficient. Apart from the accuracy of the models, we also undertake the task of calibrating the models. Simulations are carried out for a spherical satellite followed by the Champ satellite. Finally, quantification of the effect of drag coefficient uncertainty on orbit prediction is carried out for different solar activity and geomagnetic activity levels.« less
Codrescu, Mihail V.; Codrescu, Stefan M.; Fedrizzi, Mariangel(
, Journal of Space Weather and Space Climate)
To improve Thermosphere–Ionosphere modeling during disturbed conditions, data assimilation schemes that can account for the large and fast-moving gradients moving through the modeled domain are necessary. We argue that this requires a physics based background model with a non-stationary covariance. An added benefit of using physics-based models would be improved forecasting capability over largely persistence-based forecasts of empirical models. As a reference implementation, we have developed an ensemble Kalman Filter (enKF) software called Thermosphere Ionosphere Data Assimilation (TIDA) using the physics-based Coupled Thermosphere Ionosphere Plasmasphere electrodynamics (CTIPe) model as the background. In this paper, we present detailed results from experiments during the 2003 Halloween Storm, 27–31 October 2003, under very disturbed ( K p = 9) conditions while assimilating GRACE-A and B, and CHAMP neutral density measurements. TIDA simulates this disturbed period without using the L1 solar wind measurements, which were contaminated by solar energetic protons, by estimating the model drivers from the density measurements. We also briefly present statistical results for two additional storms: September 27 – October 2, 2002, and July 26 – 30, 2004, to show that the improvement in assimilated neutral density specification is not an artifact of the corrupted forcing observations during the 2003 Halloween Storm.more »By showing statistical results from assimilating one satellite at a time, we show that TIDA produces a coherent global specification for neutral density throughout the storm – a critical capability in calculating satellite drag and debris collision avoidance for space traffic management.« less
Hussain, Mir Zaman; Hamilton, Stephen; Robertson, G. Philip; Basso, Bruno(
)
Abstract
Excessive phosphorus (P) applications to croplands can contribute to eutrophication of surface waters through surface runoff and subsurface (leaching) losses. We analyzed leaching losses of total dissolved P (TDP) from no-till corn, hybrid poplar (Populus nigra X P. maximowiczii), switchgrass (Panicum virgatum), miscanthus (Miscanthus giganteus), native grasses, and restored prairie, all planted in 2008 on former cropland in Michigan, USA. All crops except corn (13 kg P ha−1 year−1) were grown without P fertilization. Biomass was harvested at the end of each growing season except for poplar. Soil water at 1.2 m depth was sampled weekly to biweekly for TDP determination during March–November 2009–2016 using tension lysimeters. Soil test P (0–25 cm depth) was measured every autumn. Soil water TDP concentrations were usually below levels where eutrophication of surface waters is frequently observed (> 0.02 mg L−1) but often higher than in deep groundwater or nearby streams and lakes. Rates of P leaching, estimated from measured concentrations and modeled drainage, did not differ statistically among cropping systems across years; 7-year cropping system means ranged from 0.035 to 0.072 kg P ha−1 year−1 with large interannual variation. Leached P was positively related to STP, which decreased over the 7 years in all systems. These results indicate that both P-fertilized and unfertilized cropping systems may
leach legacy P from past cropland management.
Methods
Experimental details The Biofuel Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) is located at the W.K. Kellogg Biological Station (KBS) (42.3956° N, 85.3749° W; elevation 288 m asl) in southwestern Michigan, USA. This site is a part of the Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (www.glbrc.org) and is a Long-term Ecological Research site (www.lter.kbs.msu.edu). Soils are mesic Typic Hapludalfs developed on glacial outwash54 with high sand content (76% in the upper 150 cm) intermixed with silt-rich loess in the upper 50 cm55. The water table lies approximately 12–14 m below the surface. The climate is humid temperate with a mean annual air temperature of 9.1 °C and annual precipitation of 1005 mm, 511 mm of which falls between May and September (1981–2010)56,57. The BCSE was established as a randomized complete block design in 2008 on preexisting farmland. Prior to BCSE establishment, the field was used for grain crop and alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) production for several decades. Between 2003 and 2007, the field received a total of ~ 300 kg P ha−1 as manure, and the southern half, which contains one of four replicate plots, received an additional 206 kg P ha−1 as inorganic fertilizer. The experimental design consists of five randomized blocks each containing one replicate plot (28 by 40 m) of 10 cropping systems (treatments) (Supplementary Fig. S1; also see Sanford et al.58). Block 5 is not included in the present study. Details on experimental design and site history are provided in Robertson and Hamilton57 and Gelfand et al.59. Leaching of P is analyzed in six of the cropping systems: (i) continuous no-till corn, (ii) switchgrass, (iii) miscanthus, (iv) a mixture of five species of native grasses, (v) a restored native prairie containing 18 plant species (Supplementary Table S1), and (vi) hybrid poplar. Agronomic management Phenological cameras and field observations indicated that the perennial herbaceous crops emerged each year between mid-April and mid-May. Corn was planted each year in early May. Herbaceous crops were harvested at the end of each growing season with the timing depending on weather: between October and November for corn and between November and December for herbaceous perennial crops. Corn stover was harvested shortly after corn grain, leaving approximately 10 cm height of stubble above the ground. The poplar was harvested only once, as the culmination of a 6-year rotation, in the winter of 2013–2014. Leaf emergence and senescence based on daily phenological images indicated the beginning and end of the poplar growing season, respectively, in each year. Application of inorganic fertilizers to the different crops followed a management approach typical for the region (Table 1). Corn was fertilized with 13 kg P ha−1 year−1 as starter fertilizer (N-P-K of 19-17-0) at the time of planting and an additional 33 kg P ha−1 year−1 was added as superphosphate in spring 2015. Corn also received N fertilizer around the time of planting and in mid-June at typical rates for the region (Table 1). No P fertilizer was applied to the perennial grassland or poplar systems (Table 1). All perennial grasses (except restored prairie) were provided 56 kg N ha−1 year−1 of N fertilizer in early summer between 2010 and 2016; an additional 77 kg N ha−1 was applied to miscanthus in 2009. Poplar was fertilized once with 157 kg N ha−1 in 2010 after the canopy had closed. Sampling of subsurface soil water and soil for P determination Subsurface soil water samples were collected beneath the root zone (1.2 m depth) using samplers installed at approximately 20 cm into the unconsolidated sand of 2Bt2 and 2E/Bt horizons (soils at the site are described in Crum and Collins54). Soil water was collected from two kinds of samplers: Prenart samplers constructed of Teflon and silica (http://www.prenart.dk/soil-water-samplers/) in replicate blocks 1 and 2 and Eijkelkamp ceramic samplers (http://www.eijkelkamp.com) in blocks 3 and 4 (Supplementary Fig. S1). The samplers were installed in 2008 at an angle using a hydraulic corer, with the sampling tubes buried underground within the plots and the sampler located about 9 m from the plot edge. There were no consistent differences in TDP concentrations between the two sampler types. Beginning in the 2009 growing season, subsurface soil water was sampled at weekly to biweekly intervals during non-frozen periods (April–November) by applying 50 kPa of vacuum to each sampler for 24 h, during which the extracted water was collected in glass bottles. Samples were filtered using different filter types (all 0.45 µm pore size) depending on the volume of leachate collected: 33-mm dia. cellulose acetate membrane filters when volumes were less than 50 mL; and 47-mm dia. Supor 450 polyethersulfone membrane filters for larger volumes. Total dissolved phosphorus (TDP) in water samples was analyzed by persulfate digestion of filtered samples to convert all phosphorus forms to soluble reactive phosphorus, followed by colorimetric analysis by long-pathlength spectrophotometry (UV-1800 Shimadzu, Japan) using the molybdate blue method60, for which the method detection limit was ~ 0.005 mg P L−1. Between 2009 and 2016, soil samples (0–25 cm depth) were collected each autumn from all plots for determination of soil test P (STP) by the Bray-1 method61, using as an extractant a dilute hydrochloric acid and ammonium fluoride solution, as is recommended for neutral to slightly acidic soils. The measured STP concentration in mg P kg−1 was converted to kg P ha−1 based on soil sampling depth and soil bulk density (mean, 1.5 g cm−3). Sampling of water samples from lakes, streams and wells for P determination In addition to chemistry of soil and subsurface soil water in the BCSE, waters from lakes, streams, and residential water supply wells were also sampled during 2009–2016 for TDP analysis using Supor 450 membrane filters and the same analytical method as for soil water. These water bodies are within 15 km of the study site, within a landscape mosaic of row crops, grasslands, deciduous forest, and wetlands, with some residential development (Supplementary Fig. S2, Supplementary Table S2). Details of land use and cover change in the vicinity of KBS are given in Hamilton et al.48, and patterns in nutrient concentrations in local surface waters are further discussed in Hamilton62. Leaching estimates, modeled drainage, and data analysis Leaching was estimated at daily time steps and summarized as total leaching on a crop-year basis, defined from the date of planting or leaf emergence in a given year to the day prior to planting or emergence in the following year. TDP concentrations (mg L−1) of subsurface soil water were linearly interpolated between sampling dates during non-freezing periods (April–November) and over non-sampling periods (December–March) based on the preceding November and subsequent April samples. Daily rates of TDP leaching (kg ha−1) were calculated by multiplying concentration (mg L−1) by drainage rates (m3 ha−1 day−1) modeled by the Systems Approach for Land Use Sustainability (SALUS) model, a crop growth model that is well calibrated for KBS soil and environmental conditions. SALUS simulates yield and environmental outcomes in response to weather, soil, management (planting dates, plant population, irrigation, N fertilizer application, and tillage), and genetics63. The SALUS water balance sub-model simulates surface runoff, saturated and unsaturated water flow, drainage, root water uptake, and evapotranspiration during growing and non-growing seasons63. The SALUS model has been used in studies of evapotranspiration48,51,64 and nutrient leaching20,65,66,67 from KBS soils, and its predictions of growing-season evapotranspiration are consistent with independent measurements based on growing-season soil water drawdown53 and evapotranspiration measured by eddy covariance68. Phosphorus leaching was assumed insignificant on days when SALUS predicted no drainage. Volume-weighted mean TDP concentrations in leachate for each crop-year and for the entire 7-year study period were calculated as the total dissolved P leaching flux (kg ha−1) divided by the total drainage (m3 ha−1). One-way ANOVA with time (crop-year) as the fixed factor was conducted to compare total annual drainage rates, P leaching rates, volume-weighted mean TDP concentrations, and maximum aboveground biomass among the cropping systems over all seven crop-years as well as with TDP concentrations from local lakes, streams, and groundwater wells. When a significant (α = 0.05) difference was detected among the groups, we used the Tukey honest significant difference (HSD) post-hoc test to make pairwise comparisons among the groups. In the case of maximum aboveground biomass, we used the Tukey–Kramer method to make pairwise comparisons among the groups because the absence of poplar data after the 2013 harvest resulted in unequal sample sizes. We also used the Tukey–Kramer method to compare the frequency distributions of TDP concentrations in all of the soil leachate samples with concentrations in lakes, streams, and groundwater wells, since each sample category had very different numbers of measurements.
Other
Individual spreadsheets in “data table_leaching_dissolved organic carbon and nitrogen.xls” 1. annual precip_drainage 2. biomass_corn, perennial grasses 3. biomass_poplar 4. annual N leaching _vol-wtd conc 5. Summary_N leached 6. annual DOC leachin_vol-wtd conc 7. growing season length 8. correlation_nh4 VS no3 9. correlations_don VS no3_doc VS don Each spreadsheet is described below along with an explanation of variates. Note that ‘nan’ indicate data are missing or not available. First row indicates header; second row indicates units 1. Spreadsheet: annual precip_drainage Description: Precipitation measured from nearby Kellogg Biological Station (KBS) Long Term Ecological Research (LTER) Weather station, over 2009-2016 study period. Data shown in Figure 1; original data source for precipitation (https://lter.kbs.msu.edu/datatables/7). Drainage estimated from SALUS crop model. Note that drainage is percolation out of the root zone (0-125 cm). Annual precipitation and drainage values shown here are calculated for growing and non-growing crop periods. Variate Description year year of the observation crop “corn” “switchgrass” “miscanthus” “nativegrass” “restored prairie” “poplar” precip_G precipitation during growing period (milliMeter) precip_NG precipitation during non-growing period (milliMeter) drainage_G drainage during growing period (milliMeter) drainage_NG drainage during non-growing period (milliMeter) 2. Spreadsheet: biomass_corn, perennial grasses Description: Maximum aboveground biomass measurements from corn, switchgrass, miscanthus, native grass and restored prairie plots in Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC) Biomass Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) during 2009-2015. Data shown in Figure 2. Variate Description year year of the observation date day of the observation (mm/dd/yyyy) crop “corn” “switchgrass” “miscanthus” “nativegrass” “restored prairie” “poplar” replicate each crop has four replicated plots, R1, R2, R3 and R4 station stations (S1, S2 and S3) of samplings within the plot. For more details, refer to link (https://data.sustainability.glbrc.org/protocols/156) species plant species that are rooted within the quadrat during the time of maximum biomass harvest. See protocol for more information, refer to link (http://lter.kbs.msu.edu/datatables/36) For maize biomass, grain and whole biomass reported in the paper (weed biomass or surface litter are excluded). Surface litter biomass not included in any crops; weed biomass not included in switchgrass and miscanthus, but included in grass mixture and prairie. fraction Fraction of biomass biomass_plot biomass per plot on dry-weight basis (Grams_Per_SquareMeter) biomass_ha biomass (megaGrams_Per_Hectare) by multiplying column biomass per plot with 0.01 3. Spreadsheet: biomass_poplar Description: Maximum aboveground biomass measurements from poplar plots in Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC) Biomass Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) during 2009-2015. Data shown in Figure 2. Note that poplar biomass was estimated from crop growth curves until the poplar was harvested in the winter of 2013-14. Variate Description year year of the observation method methods of poplar biomass sampling date day of the observation (mm/dd/yyyy) replicate each crop has four replicated plots, R1, R2, R3 and R4 diameter_at_ground poplar diameter (milliMeter) at the ground diameter_at_15cm poplar diameter (milliMeter) at 15 cm height biomass_tree biomass per plot (Grams_Per_Tree) biomass_ha biomass (megaGrams_Per_Hectare) by multiplying biomass per tree with 0.01 4. Spreadsheet: annual N leaching_vol-wtd conc Description: Annual leaching rate (kiloGrams_N_Per_Hectare) and volume-weighted mean N concentrations (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter) of nitrate (no3) and dissolved organic nitrogen (don) in the leachate samples collected from corn, switchgrass, miscanthus, native grass, restored prairie and poplar plots in Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC) Biomass Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) during 2009-2016. Data for nitrogen leached and volume-wtd mean N concentration shown in Figure 3a and Figure 3b, respectively. Note that ammonium (nh4) concentration were much lower and often undetectable (<0.07 milliGrams_N_Per_Liter). Also note that in 2009 and 2010 crop-years, data from some replicates are missing. Variate Description crop “corn” “switchgrass” “miscanthus” “nativegrass” “restored prairie” “poplar” crop-year year of the observation replicate each crop has four replicated plots, R1, R2, R3 and R4 no3 leached annual leaching rates of nitrate (kiloGrams_N_Per_Hectare) don leached annual leaching rates of don (kiloGrams_N_Per_Hectare) vol-wtd no3 conc. Volume-weighted mean no3 concentration (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter) vol-wtd don conc. Volume-weighted mean don concentration (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter) 5. Spreadsheet: summary_N leached Description: Summary of total amount and forms of N leached (kiloGrams_N_Per_Hectare) and the percent of applied N lost to leaching over the seven years for corn, switchgrass, miscanthus, native grass, restored prairie and poplar plots in Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC) Biomass Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) during 2009-2016. Data for nitrogen amount leached shown in Figure 4a and percent of applied N lost shown in Figure 4b. Note the fraction of unleached N includes in harvest, accumulation in root biomass, soil organic matter or gaseous N emissions were not measured in the study. Variate Description crop “corn” “switchgrass” “miscanthus” “nativegrass” “restored prairie” “poplar” no3 leached annual leaching rates of nitrate (kiloGrams_N_Per_Hectare) don leached annual leaching rates of don (kiloGrams_N_Per_Hectare) N unleached N unleached (kiloGrams_N_Per_Hectare) in other sources are not studied % of N applied N lost to leaching % of N applied N lost to leaching 6. Spreadsheet: annual DOC leachin_vol-wtd conc Description: Annual leaching rate (kiloGrams_Per_Hectare) and volume-weighted mean N concentrations (milliGrams_Per_Liter) of dissolved organic carbon (DOC) in the leachate samples collected from corn, switchgrass, miscanthus, native grass, restored prairie and poplar plots in Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC) Biomass Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) during 2009-2016. Data for DOC leached and volume-wtd mean DOC concentration shown in Figure 5a and Figure 5b, respectively. Note that in 2009 and 2010 crop-years, water samples were not available for DOC measurements. Variate Description crop “corn” “switchgrass” “miscanthus” “nativegrass” “restored prairie” “poplar” crop-year year of the observation replicate each crop has four replicated plots, R1, R2, R3 and R4 doc leached annual leaching rates of nitrate (kiloGrams_Per_Hectare) vol-wtd doc conc. volume-weighted mean doc concentration (milliGrams_Per_Liter) 7. Spreadsheet: growing season length Description: Growing season length (days) of corn, switchgrass, miscanthus, native grass, restored prairie and poplar plots in the Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC) Biomass Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) during 2009-2015. Date shown in Figure S2. Note that growing season is from the date of planting or emergence to the date of harvest (or leaf senescence in case of poplar). Variate Description crop “corn” “switchgrass” “miscanthus” “nativegrass” “restored prairie” “poplar” year year of the observation growing season length growing season length (days) 8. Spreadsheet: correlation_nh4 VS no3 Description: Correlation of ammonium (nh4+) and nitrate (no3-) concentrations (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter) in the leachate samples from corn, switchgrass, miscanthus, native grass, restored prairie and poplar plots in Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC) Biomass Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) during 2013-2015. Data shown in Figure S3. Note that nh4+ concentration in the leachates was very low compared to no3- and don concentration and often undetectable in three crop-years (2013-2015) when measurements are available. Variate Description crop “corn” “switchgrass” “miscanthus” “nativegrass” “restored prairie” “poplar” date date of the observation (mm/dd/yyyy) replicate each crop has four replicated plots, R1, R2, R3 and R4 nh4 conc nh4 concentration (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter) no3 conc no3 concentration (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter) 9. Spreadsheet: correlations_don VS no3_doc VS don Description: Correlations of don and nitrate concentrations (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter); and doc (milliGrams_Per_Liter) and don concentrations (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter) in the leachate samples of corn, switchgrass, miscanthus, native grass, restored prairie and poplar plots in Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC) Biomass Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) during 2013-2015. Data of correlation of don and nitrate concentrations shown in Figure S4 a and doc and don concentrations shown in Figure S4 b. Variate Description crop “corn” “switchgrass” “miscanthus” “nativegrass” “restored prairie” “poplar” year year of the observation don don concentration (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter) no3 no3 concentration (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter) doc doc concentration (milliGrams_Per_Liter) More>>
Choi, Minsoo; Rachunok, Benjamin; Nateghi, Roshanak(
, Environmental Research Letters)
Abstract
Access to accurate, generalizable and scalable solar irradiance prediction is critical for smooth solar-grid integration, especially in the light of the accelerated global adoption of solar energy production. Both physical and statistical prediction models of solar irradiance have been proposed in the literature. Physical models require meteorological forecasts—generated by computationally expensive models—to predict solar irradiance, with limited accuracy in sub-daily predictions. Statistical models leveragein-situmeasurements which require expensive equipment and do not account for meso-scale atmospheric dynamics. We address these fundamental gaps by developing a convolutional global horizontal irradiance prediction model, using convolutional neural networks and publicly accessible satellite cloud images. Our proposed model predicts solar irradiance in 12 different locations in the US for various prediction time horizons. Our model yields up to 24% improvement in an hour-ahead predictions and 26% in a day-ahead predictions compared to a persistence forecast. Moreover, using saliency maps and target-location-focused cropping, we demonstrate the benefits of incorporating meso-scale atmospheric dynamics for prediction performance. Our results are critical for energy systems planners, utility managers and electricity market participants to ensure efficient harvesting of the solar energy and reliable operation of the grid.
Licata, Richard J., and Mehta, Piyush M.. Uncertainty quantification techniques for data-driven space weather modeling: thermospheric density application. Scientific Reports 12.1 Web. doi:10.1038/s41598-022-11049-3.
Licata, Richard J., & Mehta, Piyush M.. Uncertainty quantification techniques for data-driven space weather modeling: thermospheric density application. Scientific Reports, 12 (1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-11049-3
Licata, Richard J., and Mehta, Piyush M..
"Uncertainty quantification techniques for data-driven space weather modeling: thermospheric density application". Scientific Reports 12 (1). Country unknown/Code not available: Nature Publishing Group. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-11049-3.https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10381835.
@article{osti_10381835,
place = {Country unknown/Code not available},
title = {Uncertainty quantification techniques for data-driven space weather modeling: thermospheric density application},
url = {https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10381835},
DOI = {10.1038/s41598-022-11049-3},
abstractNote = {Abstract Machine learning (ML) has been applied to space weather problems with increasing frequency in recent years, driven by an influx of in-situ measurements and a desire to improve modeling and forecasting capabilities throughout the field. Space weather originates from solar perturbations and is comprised of the resulting complex variations they cause within the numerous systems between the Sun and Earth. These systems are often tightly coupled and not well understood. This creates a need for skillful models with knowledge about the confidence of their predictions. One example of such a dynamical system highly impacted by space weather is the thermosphere, the neutral region of Earth’s upper atmosphere. Our inability to forecast it has severe repercussions in the context of satellite drag and computation of probability of collision between two space objects in low Earth orbit (LEO) for decision making in space operations. Even with (assumed) perfect forecast of model drivers, our incomplete knowledge of the system results in often inaccurate thermospheric neutral mass density predictions. Continuing efforts are being made to improve model accuracy, but density models rarely provide estimates of confidence in predictions. In this work, we propose two techniques to develop nonlinear ML regression models to predict thermospheric density while providing robust and reliable uncertainty estimates: Monte Carlo (MC) dropout and direct prediction of the probability distribution, both using the negative logarithm of predictive density (NLPD) loss function. We show the performance capabilities for models trained on both local and global datasets. We show that the NLPD loss provides similar results for both techniques but the direct probability distribution prediction method has a much lower computational cost. For the global model regressed on the Space Environment Technologies High Accuracy Satellite Drag Model (HASDM) density database, we achieve errors of approximately 11% on independent test data with well-calibrated uncertainty estimates. Using an in-situ CHAllenging Minisatellite Payload (CHAMP) density dataset, models developed using both techniques provide test error on the order of 13%. The CHAMP models—on validation and test data—are within 2% of perfect calibration for the twenty prediction intervals tested. We show that this model can also be used to obtain global density predictions with uncertainties at a given epoch.},
journal = {Scientific Reports},
volume = {12},
number = {1},
publisher = {Nature Publishing Group},
author = {Licata, Richard J. and Mehta, Piyush M.},
}