Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40295583›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Evaluation of precipitation forecasting base on GraphCast over mainland China.

Zihuang Yan, Xianghui Lu, Lifeng Wu, Fa Liu, Rangjian Qiu, Yaokui Cui, Xin Ma

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Zihuang YanSchool of Soil and Water Conservation, Nanchang Institute of Technology, Nanchang, 330099, China.
Xianghui LuSchool of Soil and Water Conservation, Nanchang Institute of Technology, Nanchang, 330099, China. xianghuilu@nit.edu.cn.
Lifeng WuSchool of Soil and Water Conservation, Nanchang Institute of Technology, Nanchang, 330099, China.
Fa LiuKey Laboratory of Water Cycle and Related Land Surface Processes, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100101, China.
Rangjian QiuState Key Laboratory of Water Resources Engineering and Management, School of Water Resources and Hydropower Engineering, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430072, China.
Yaokui CuiInstitute of RS and GIS, School of Earth and Space Sciences, Peking University, Beijing, 100871, China.
Xin MaSchool of Mathematics and Physics, Southwest University of Science and Technology, Mianyang, 621010, China.

Funding

The National Natural Science Foundation of China for the financial support 52269013
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The accurate cumulative precipitation forecasts are essential for monitoring water resources and natural disasters. The combination of deep learning and big data has become a new direction for precipitation forecasting. However, the current large models are still lacking in-situ data verification. To accomplish this goal, the precipitation forecasting performance of a state-of-the-art model GraphCast was evaluated. Using the cumulative precipitation data from 2393 observation stations for the 1-3 day period as a reference, we assessed the cumulative precipitation in mainland China region for the 1-3 day period from 2020 to 2021, utilizing a high-resolution model with 0.25° × 0.25° grid spacing and 13 layers of parameters. The precipitation of European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) was also compared. The results show that: (1) During the 2020-2021 period, for the 1-day, 2-day, and 3-day cumulative precipitation forecasts, the Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) values of GraphCast were primarily between 0.46 to 9.38 mm/d, 0.44 to 9.06 mm/d, and 0.44 to 9.06 mm/d, respectively. The Mean Error (ME) values were mainly between - 0.595 to 1.705 (0.01 mm). (2) As the forecast period extends, the forecasting capability of GraphCast declines. (3) In the 1-3 day cumulative precipitation forecasts for various stations in mainland China, GraphCast demonstrates higher predictive accuracy than ECMWF. (4) Compared to ECMWF, GraphCast demonstrated the best forecast performance in the temperate humid and semi-humid regions of Northeast China, with the RMSE being approximately 12% higher. Our study indicates that GraphCast demonstrates significant potential and higher accuracy in precipitation forecasting.

Indexed as

Cumulative precipitation forecastECMWFHigh resolutionLarge models

Identifiers

PMID40295583
PMCPMC12038038

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.