Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33583265›Full record

ArticlePhilosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences2021

Machine learning for weather and climate are worlds apart.

D Watson-Parris

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

D Watson-ParrisAtmospheric, Oceanic and Planetary Physics, Department of Physics, University of Oxford, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Modern weather and climate models share a common heritage and often even components; however, they are used in different ways to answer fundamentally different questions. As such, attempts to emulate them using machine learning should reflect this. While the use of machine learning to emulate weather forecast models is a relatively new endeavour, there is a rich history of climate model emulation. This is primarily because while weather modelling is an initial condition problem, which intimately depends on the current state of the atmosphere, climate modelling is predominantly a boundary condition problem. To emulate the response of the climate to different drivers therefore, representation of the full dynamical evolution of the atmosphere is neither necessary, or in many cases, desirable. Climate scientists are typically interested in different questions also. Indeed emulating the steady-state climate response has been possible for many years and provides significant speed increases that allow solving inverse problems for e.g. parameter estimation. Nevertheless, the large datasets, non-linear relationships and limited training data make climate a domain which is rich in interesting machine learning challenges. Here, I seek to set out the current state of climate model emulation and demonstrate how, despite some challenges, recent advances in machine learning provide new opportunities for creating useful statistical models of the climate. This article is part of the theme issue 'Machine learning for weather and climate modelling'.

Indexed as

climateclimate modellingmachine learning

Identifiers

PMID33583265
PMCPMC7898127

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.