Developing a new high-resolution weather prediction model using AI

Recent advancements in AI-based Weather Prediction (AIWP) are causing a paradigm shift in global weather forecasting.

Recent data-driven models, in particular, Google DeepMind's GraphCast, have demonstrated that AI-based models can match or even outperform the best global numerical weather prediction model, namely ECMWF’s Integrated Forecasting System, while significantly reducing computation time. Building on these developments, ECMWF has made substantial progress in AIWP, with their current AI forecasting system, surpassing GraphCast in accuracy for e.g. temperature (see Figure 1). However, for operational use at KNMI, these forecasts need to be generated at much higher resolution (~ 2 km) than that of AIFS (currently ~31 km). Furthermore, previous research has highlighted the limitations of AIWP models in predicting precipitation and extreme weather events (see Figure 2), necessitating targeted improvements for these events as well.

The goals of this project are, therefore, three-fold. Firstly, we will tackle the need of localized higher resolution forecasting by following a stretched-grid approach (see Figure 3 for an example) within the AIFS model, similar to Nipen et al. (2024). This will allow for higher-resolution forecasts in a specific region while maintaining a lower-resolution on the rest of the globe. Secondly, since weather forecasts are inherently uncertain, we will develop ensemble forecasts based on the stretched-grid paradigm, following the recent advancements in probabilistic forecasting from Google DeepMind, ECMWF and Met Norway. Lastly, we will investigate the usage of different loss functions for training AIWP models that facilitate the forecasting of extreme events while, at the same time, having a limited impact on the models’ overall accuracy.

 

 

RMSE for IFS and several AIWP forecasts of 2-m temperature in the northern hemisphere
Figure 1: RMSE for IFS (red) and several AIWP (other colors) forecasts of 2-m temperature in the northern hemisphere, evaluated against synoptic observations for September––November 2023 (more details at https://www.ecmwf.int/en/about/media-centre/aifs-blog/2024/first- update-aifs).
Near-surface wind and MSLP structure of Storm Ciarán
Figure 2: Near-surface wind and MSLP structure of Storm Ciarán at 00 UTC on 2 November 2023 from reanalysis and forecasts. Maps of 10-m wind speed (shading) and MSLP (contours) from (a) ERA5 and (b)–(f) forecasts, initialised at 00 UTC 31 October 2023, from the (b) IFS HRES model and (c)–(f) ML models, as labelled. (from Charlton-Perez et al., 2024)
Map with annotated grid points centered around the Nordics and regional grid
Figure 3: (a) Map with annotated grid points centered around the Nordics. Global grid points are green, regional grid points are gray. (b) Input grid on the boundary between global and regional domain. (c) The encoder processes information into a mesh node from the 12 nearest grid points. (d) The processor mesh contains latent information, and has finer refinement over the regional than the global domain. (e) The decoder processes information back to a grid node from the 3 nearest mesh nodes. (from Nipen et al., 2024)

References

Nipen, T. N., et al. (2024): Regional data-driven weather modeling with a global stretched-grid. Preprint, https://arxiv.org/html/2409.02891v1

Charlton-Perez, A. J.et al. (2024). Do AI models produce better weather forecasts than physics-based models? A quantitative evaluation case study of Storm Ciarán. npj Climate and Atmospheric Science, 7(1), 93, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-024-00638-w