Search for: All records

Abstract We discuss the emerging advances and opportunities at the intersection of machine learning (ML) and climate physics, highlighting the use of ML techniques, including supervised, unsupervised, and equation discovery, to accelerate climate knowledge discoveries and simulations. We delineate two distinct yet complementary aspects: (a) ML for climate physics and (b) ML for climate simulations. Although physics-free ML-based models, such as ML-based weather forecasting, have demonstrated success when data are abundant and stationary, the physics knowledge and interpretability of ML models become crucial in the small-data/nonstationary regime to ensure generalizability. Given the absence of observations, the long-term future climate falls into the small-data regime. Therefore, ML for climate physics holds a critical role in addressing the challenges of ML for climate simulations. We emphasize the need for collaboration among climate physics, ML theory, and numerical analysis to achieve reliable ML-based models for climate applications. 

Abstract The climatological mean barotropic vorticity budget is analyzed to investigate the relative importance of surface wind stress, topography, planetary vorticity advection, and nonlinear advection in dynamical balances in a global ocean simulation. In addition to a pronounced regional variability in vorticity balances, the relative magnitudes of vorticity budget terms strongly depend on the length‐scale of interest. To carry out a length‐scale dependent vorticity analysis in different ocean basins, vorticity budget terms are spatially coarse‐grained. At length‐scales greater than 1,000 km, the dynamics closely follow the Topographic‐Sverdrup balance in which bottom pressure torque, surface wind stress curl and planetary vorticity advection terms are in balance. In contrast, when including all length‐scales resolved by the model, bottom pressure torque and nonlinear advection terms dominate the vorticity budget (Topographic‐Nonlinear balance), which suggests a prominent role of oceanic eddies, which are of km in size, and the associated bottom pressure anomalies in local vorticity balances at length‐scales smaller than 1,000 km. Overall, there is a transition from the Topographic‐Nonlinear regime at scales smaller than 1,000 km to the Topographic‐Sverdrup regime at length‐scales greater than 1,000 km. These dynamical balances hold across all ocean basins; however, interpretations of the dominant vorticity balances depend on the level of spatial filtering or the effective model resolution. On the other hand, the contribution of bottom and lateral friction terms in the barotropic vorticity budget remains small and is significant only near sea‐land boundaries, where bottom stress and horizontal viscous friction generally peak.