ArticleScientific reports2026
A physics-guided machine learning framework for enhancing dust storm visibility prediction in arid and semi-arid regions.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Dust sharply degrades visibility in arid and semi-arid regions, yet operational forecasting remains challenged by near-surface process errors in numerical weather prediction (NWP) and the poor generalization of purely data-driven models. We present a physics-guided machine learning (PGML) framework that post-processes European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) forecasts to predict five ordinal visibility grades over the Kumtag Desert. A dust-lifecycle feature library (emission, vertical mixing, transport, wet scavenging) is coupled with an ordinal LightGBM architecture. On an independent test period, the model attains quadratic weighted kappa (QWK) of 0.26 (0-24 h), 0.17 (24-48 h), and 0.18 (48-72 h), with mean absolute error (MAE) of 0.48-0.56; gains versus data-only baselines increase with forecast horizon. Ablation experiments show that physics priors can effectively improve visibility prediction accuracy-reducing MAE by up to 10% and sustaining QWK beyond 24 h by constraining non-physical drift. Accordingly, the PGML visibility predictions show improved performance relative to data-only baselines. SHAP analysis reveals a forecast-horizon-dependent mechanistic shift from emission/surface-layer dynamics to stability-controlled vertical mixing, consistent with dust dynamics. The framework offers an interpretable, transferable paradigm for physics-constrained environmental forecasting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.