skip to main content


This content will become publicly available on October 1, 2024

Title: Machine Learning for Daily Forecasts of Arctic Sea Ice Motion: An Attribution Assessment of Model Predictive Skill
Physics-based simulations of Arctic sea ice are highly complex, involving transport between different phases, length scales, and time scales. Resultantly, numerical simulations of sea ice dynamics have a high computational cost and model uncertainty. We employ data-driven machine learning (ML) to make predictions of sea ice motion. The ML models are built to predict present-day sea ice velocity given present-day wind velocity and previous-day sea ice concentration and velocity. Models are trained using reanalysis winds and satellite-derived sea ice properties. We compare the predictions of three different models: persistence (PS), linear regression (LR), and a convolutional neural network (CNN). We quantify the spatiotemporal variability of the correlation between observations and the statistical model predictions. Additionally, we analyze model performance in comparison to variability in properties related to ice motion (wind velocity, ice velocity, ice concentration, distance from coast, bathymetric depth) to understand the processes related to decreases in model performance. Results indicate that a CNN makes skillful predictions of daily sea ice velocity with a correlation up to 0.81 between predicted and observed sea ice velocity, while the LR and PS implementations exhibit correlations of 0.78 and 0.69, respectively. The correlation varies spatially and seasonally: lower values occur in shallow coastal regions and during times of minimum sea ice extent. LR parameter analysis indicates that wind velocity plays the largest role in predicting sea ice velocity on 1-day time scales, particularly in the central Arctic. Regions where wind velocity has the largest LR parameter are regions where the CNN has higher predictive skill than the LR.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1928305 1936222
NSF-PAR ID:
10481308
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ; ; ;
Publisher / Repository:
AMS
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Artificial Intelligence for the Earth Systems
Volume:
2
Issue:
4
ISSN:
2769-7525
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Although standard statistical methods and climate models can simulate and predict sea-ice changes well, it is still very hard to distinguish some direct and robust factors associated with sea-ice changes from its internal variability and other noises. Here, with long-term observations (38 years from 1980 to 2017), we apply the causal effect networks algorithm to explore the direct precursors of September Arctic sea-ice extent by adjusting the maximal lead time from one to eight months. For lead time of more than three months, June downward longwave radiation flux in the Canadian Arctic Archipelago is the only one precursor. However, for lead time of 1–3 months, August sea-ice concentration in Western Arctic represents the strongest positive correlation with September sea-ice extent, while August sea-ice concentration factors in other regions have weaker influences on the marginal seas. Other precursors include August wind anomalies in the lower latitudes accompanied with an Arctic high pressure anomaly, which induces the sea-ice loss along the Eurasian coast. These robust precursors can be used to improve the seasonal predictions of Arctic sea ice and evaluate the climate models. 
    more » « less
  2. Abstract

    Previous findings show that large-scale atmospheric circulation plays an important role in driving Arctic sea ice variability from synoptic to seasonal time scales. While some circulation patterns responsible for Barents–Kara sea ice changes have been identified in previous works, the most important patterns and the role of their persistence remain unclear. Our study uses self-organizing maps to identify nine high-latitude circulation patterns responsible for day-to-day Barents–Kara sea ice changes. Circulation patterns with a high pressure center over the Urals (Scandinavia) and a low pressure center over Iceland (Greenland) are found to be the most important for Barents–Kara sea ice loss. Their opposite-phase counterparts are found to be the most important for sea ice growth. The persistence of these circulation patterns helps explain sea ice variability from synoptic to seasonal time scales. We further use sea ice models forced by observed atmospheric fields (including the surface circulation and temperature) to reproduce observed sea ice variability and diagnose the role of atmosphere-driven thermodynamic and dynamic processes. Results show that thermodynamic and dynamic processes similarly contribute to Barents–Kara sea ice concentration changes on synoptic time scales via circulation. On seasonal time scales, thermodynamic processes seem to play a stronger role than dynamic processes. Overall, our study highlights the importance of large-scale atmospheric circulation, its persistence, and varying physical processes in shaping sea ice variability across multiple time scales, which has implications for seasonal sea ice prediction.

    Significance Statement

    Understanding what processes lead to Arctic sea ice changes is important due to their significant impacts on the ecosystem, weather, and shipping, and hence our society. A well-known process that causes sea ice changes is atmospheric circulation variability. We further pin down what circulation patterns and underlying mechanisms matter. We identify multiple circulation patterns responsible for sea ice loss and growth to different extents. We find that the circulation can cause sea ice loss by mechanically pushing sea ice northward and bringing warm and moist air to melt sea ice. The two processes are similarly important. Our study advances understanding of the Arctic sea ice variability with important implications for Arctic sea ice prediction.

     
    more » « less
  3. Recent climate change in the Arctic has been rapid and dramatic, leading to numerous physical and societal consequences. Many studies have investigated these ongoing and projected future changes across a range of climatic variables, but surprisingly little attention has been paid to wind speed, despite its known importance for sea ice motion, ocean wave heights, and coastal erosion. Here we analyzed future trends in Arctic surface wind speed and its relationship with sea ice cover among CMIP5 global climate models. There is a strong anticorrelation between climatological sea ice concentration and wind speed in the early 21st-century reference climate, and the vast majority of models simulate widespread future strengthening of surface winds over the Arctic Ocean (annual multi-model mean trend of up to 0.8 m s−1 or 13%). Nearly all models produce an inverse relationship between projected changes in sea ice cover and wind speed, such that grid cells with virtually total ice loss almost always experience stronger winds. Consistent with the largest regional ice losses during autumn and winter, the greatest increases in future wind speeds are expected during these two seasons, with localized strengthening up to 23%. As in other studies, stronger surface winds cannot be attributed to tighter pressure gradients but rather to some combination of weakened atmospheric stability and reduced surface roughness as the surface warms and melts. The intermodel spread of wind speed changes, as expressed by the two most contrasting model results, appears to stem from differences in the treatment of surface roughness. 
    more » « less
  4. Abstract The predictability of sea ice during extreme sea ice loss events on subseasonal (daily to weekly) time scales is explored in dynamical forecast models. These extreme sea ice loss events (defined as the 5th percentile of the 5-day change in sea ice extent) exhibit substantial regional and seasonal variability; in the central Arctic Ocean basin, most subseasonal rapid ice loss occurs in the summer, but in the marginal seas rapid sea ice loss occurs year-round. Dynamical forecast models are largely able to capture the seasonality of these extreme sea ice loss events. In most regions in the summertime, sea ice forecast skill is lower on extreme sea ice loss days than on nonextreme days, despite evidence that links these extreme events to large-scale atmospheric patterns; in the wintertime, the difference between extreme and nonextreme days is less pronounced. In a damped anomaly forecast benchmark estimate, the forecast error remains high following extreme sea ice loss events and does not return to typical error levels for many weeks; this signal is less robust in the dynamical forecast models but still present. Overall, these results suggest that sea ice forecast skill is generally lower during and after extreme sea ice loss events and also that, while dynamical forecast models are capable of simulating extreme sea ice loss events with similar characteristics to what we observe, forecast skill from dynamical models is limited by biases in mean state and variability and errors in the initialization. Significance Statement We studied weather model forecasts of changes in Arctic sea ice extent on day-to-day time scales in different regions and seasons. We were especially interested in extreme sea ice loss days, or days in which sea ice melts very quickly or is reduced due to diverging forces such as winds, ocean currents, and waves. We find that forecast models generally capture the observed timing of extreme sea ice loss days. We also find that forecasts of sea ice extent are worse on extreme sea ice loss days compared to typical days, and that forecast errors remain elevated following extreme sea ice loss events. 
    more » « less
  5. Abstract. Arctic sea ice experiences a dramatic annual cycle, and seasonal ice loss and growth can be characterized by various metrics: melt onset, breakup, opening, freeze onset, freeze-up, and closing. By evaluating a range of seasonal sea ice metrics, CMIP6 sea ice simulations can be evaluated in more detail than by using traditional metrics alone, such as sea ice area. We show that models capture the observed asymmetry in seasonal sea ice transitions, with spring ice loss taking about 1–2 months longer than fall ice growth. The largest impacts of internal variability are seen in the inflow regions for melt and freeze onset dates, but all metrics show pan-Arctic model spreads exceeding the internal variability range, indicating the contribution of model differences. Through climate model evaluation in the context of both observations and internal variability, we show that biases in seasonal transition dates can compensate for other unrealistic aspects of simulated sea ice. In some models, this leads to September sea ice areas in agreement with observations for the wrong reasons. 
    more » « less