Search for: All records

Abstract An ensemble postprocessing method is developed to improve the probabilistic forecasts of extreme precipitation events across the conterminous United States (CONUS). The method combines a 3D vision transformer (ViT) for bias correction with a latent diffusion model (LDM), a generative artificial intelligence (AI) method, to postprocess 6-hourly precipitation ensemble forecasts and produce an enlarged generative ensemble that contains spatiotemporally consistent precipitation trajectories. These trajectories are expected to improve the characterization of extreme precipitation events and offer skillful multiday accumulated and 6-hourly precipitation guidance. The method is tested using the Global Ensemble Forecast System (GEFS) precipitation forecasts out to day 6 and is verified against the Climatology-Calibrated Precipitation Analysis (CCPA) data. Verification results indicate that the method generated skillful ensemble members with improved continuous ranked probabilistic skill scores (CRPSSs) and Brier skill scores (BSSs) over the raw operational GEFS and a multivariate statistical postprocessing baseline. It showed skillful and reliable probabilities for events at extreme precipitation thresholds. Explainability studies were further conducted, which revealed the decision-making process of the method and confirmed its effectiveness on ensemble member generation. This work introduces a novel, generative AI–based approach to address the limitation of small numerical ensembles and the need for larger ensembles to identify extreme precipitation events. Significance StatementWe use a new artificial intelligence (AI) technique to improve extreme precipitation forecasts from a numerical weather prediction ensemble, generating more scenarios that better characterize extreme precipitation events. This AI-generated ensemble improved the accuracy of precipitation forecasts and probabilistic warnings for extreme precipitation events. The study explores AI methods to generate precipitation forecasts and explains the decision-making mechanisms of such AI techniques to prove their effectiveness. 

Abstract AI-based algorithms are emerging in many meteorological applications that produce imagery as output, including for global weather forecasting models. However, the imagery produced by AI algorithms, especially by convolutional neural networks (CNNs), is often described as too blurry to look realistic, partly because CNNs tend to represent uncertainty as blurriness. This blurriness can be undesirable since it might obscure important meteorological features. More complex AI models, such as Generative AI models, produce images that appear to be sharper. However, improved sharpness may come at the expense of a decline in other performance criteria, such as standard forecast verification metrics. To navigate any trade-off between sharpness and other performance metrics it is important to quantitatively assess those other metrics along with sharpness. While there is a rich set of forecast verification metrics available for meteorological images, none of them focus on sharpness. This paper seeks to fill this gap by 1) exploring a variety of sharpness metrics from other fields, 2) evaluating properties of these metrics, 3) proposing the new concept of Gaussian Blur Equivalence as a tool for their uniform interpretation, and 4) demonstrating their use for sample meteorological applications, including a CNN that emulates radar imagery from satellite imagery (GREMLIN) and an AI-based global weather forecasting model (GraphCast). 

Abstract Robust quantification of predictive uncertainty is a critical addition needed for machine learning applied to weather and climate problems to improve the understanding of what is driving prediction sensitivity. Ensembles of machine learning models provide predictive uncertainty estimates in a conceptually simple way but require multiple models for training and prediction, increasing computational cost and latency. Parametric deep learning can estimate uncertainty with one model by predicting the parameters of a probability distribution but does not account for epistemic uncertainty. Evidential deep learning, a technique that extends parametric deep learning to higher-order distributions, can account for both aleatoric and epistemic uncertainties with one model. This study compares the uncertainty derived from evidential neural networks to that obtained from ensembles. Through applications of the classification of winter precipitation type and regression of surface-layer fluxes, we show evidential deep learning models attaining predictive accuracy rivaling standard methods while robustly quantifying both sources of uncertainty. We evaluate the uncertainty in terms of how well the predictions are calibrated and how well the uncertainty correlates with prediction error. Analyses of uncertainty in the context of the inputs reveal sensitivities to underlying meteorological processes, facilitating interpretation of the models. The conceptual simplicity, interpretability, and computational efficiency of evidential neural networks make them highly extensible, offering a promising approach for reliable and practical uncertainty quantification in Earth system science modeling. To encourage broader adoption of evidential deep learning, we have developed a new Python package, Machine Integration and Learning for Earth Systems (MILES) group Generalized Uncertainty for Earth System Science (GUESS) (MILES-GUESS) (https://github.com/ai2es/miles-guess), that enables users to train and evaluate both evidential and ensemble deep learning. Significance StatementThis study demonstrates a new technique, evidential deep learning, for robust and computationally efficient uncertainty quantification in modeling the Earth system. The method integrates probabilistic principles into deep neural networks, enabling the estimation of both aleatoric uncertainty from noisy data and epistemic uncertainty from model limitations using a single model. Our analyses reveal how decomposing these uncertainties provides valuable insights into reliability, accuracy, and model shortcomings. We show that the approach can rival standard methods in classification and regression tasks within atmospheric science while offering practical advantages such as computational efficiency. With further advances, evidential networks have the potential to enhance risk assessment and decision-making across meteorology by improving uncertainty quantification, a longstanding challenge. This work establishes a strong foundation and motivation for the broader adoption of evidential learning, where properly quantifying uncertainties is critical yet lacking. 

Abstract Artificial intelligence (AI) can be used to improve performance across a wide range of Earth system prediction tasks. As with any application of AI, it is important for AI to be developed in an ethical and responsible manner to minimize bias and other effects. In this work, we extend our previous work demonstrating how AI can go wrong with weather and climate applications by presenting a categorization of bias for AI in the Earth sciences. This categorization can assist AI developers to identify potential biases that can affect their model throughout the AI development life cycle. We highlight examples from a variety of Earth system prediction tasks of each category of bias. 

This project developed a pre-interview survey, interview protocols, and materials for conducting interviews with expert users to better understand how they assess and make use decisions about new AI/ML guidance. Weather forecasters access and synthesize myriad sources of information when forecasting for high-impact, severe weather events. In recent years, artificial intelligence (AI) techniques have increasingly been used to produce new guidance tools with the goal of aiding weather forecasting, including for severe weather. For this study, we leveraged these advances to explore how National Weather Service (NWS) forecasters perceive the use of new AI guidance for forecasting severe hail and storm mode. We also specifically examine which guidance features are important for how forecasters assess the trustworthiness of new AI guidance. To this aim, we conducted online, structured interviews with NWS forecasters from across the Eastern, Central, and Southern Regions. The interviews covered the forecasters’ approaches and challenges for forecasting severe weather, perceptions of AI and its use in forecasting, and reactions to one of two experimental (i.e., non-operational) AI severe weather guidance: probability of severe hail or probability of storm mode. During the interview, the forecasters went through a self-guided review of different sets of information about the development (spin-up information, AI model technique, training of AI model, input information) and performance (verification metrics, interactive output, output comparison to operational guidance) of the presented guidance. The forecasters then assessed how the information influenced their perception of how trustworthy the guidance was and whether or not they would consider using it for forecasting. This project includes the pre-interview survey, survey data, interview protocols, and accompanying information boards used for the interviews. There is one set of interview materials in which AI/ML are mentioned throughout and another set where AI/ML were only mentioned at the end of the interviews. We did this to better understand how the label “AI/ML” did or did not affect how interviewees responded to interview questions and reviewed the information board. We also leverage think aloud methods with the information board, the instructions for which are included in the interview protocols. 

Abstract Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) pose a challenge for achieving science that is both reproducible and replicable. The challenge is compounded in supervised models that depend on manually labeled training data, as they introduce additional decision‐making and processes that require thorough documentation and reporting. We address these limitations by providing an approach to hand labeling training data for supervised ML that integrates quantitative content analysis (QCA)—a method from social science research. The QCA approach provides a rigorous and well‐documented hand labeling procedure to improve the replicability and reproducibility of supervised ML applications in Earth systems science (ESS), as well as the ability to evaluate them. Specifically, the approach requires (a) the articulation and documentation of the exact decision‐making process used for assigning hand labels in a “codebook” and (b) an empirical evaluation of the reliability” of the hand labelers. In this paper, we outline the contributions of QCA to the field, along with an overview of the general approach. We then provide a case study to further demonstrate how this framework has and can be applied when developing supervised ML models for applications in ESS. With this approach, we provide an actionable path forward for addressing ethical considerations and goals outlined by recent AGU work on ML ethics in ESS. 

Abstract While convective storm mode is explicitly depicted in convection-allowing model (CAM) output, subjectively diagnosing mode in large volumes of CAM forecasts can be burdensome. In this work, four machine learning (ML) models were trained to probabilistically classify CAM storms into one of three modes: supercells, quasi-linear convective systems, and disorganized convection. The four ML models included a dense neural network (DNN), logistic regression (LR), a convolutional neural network (CNN) and semi-supervised CNN-Gaussian mixture model (GMM). The DNN, CNN, and LR were trained with a set of hand-labeled CAM storms, while the semi-supervised GMM used updraft helicity and storm size to generate clusters which were then hand labeled. When evaluated using storms withheld from training, the four classifiers had similar ability to discriminate between modes, but the GMM had worse calibration. The DNN and LR had similar objective performance to the CNN, suggesting that CNN-based methods may not be needed for mode classification tasks. The mode classifications from all four classifiers successfully approximated the known climatology of modes in the U.S., including a maximum in supercell occurrence in the U.S. Central Plains. Further, the modes also occurred in environments recognized to support the three different storm morphologies. Finally, storm mode provided useful information about hazard type, e.g., storm reports were most likely with supercells, further supporting the efficacy of the classifiers. Future applications, including the use of objective CAM mode classifications as a novel predictor in ML systems, could potentially lead to improved forecasts of convective hazards.