R. Sobash, D. Gagne, Charlie Becker, D. Ahijevych, Gabrielle Gantos, C. Schwartz
{"title":"在允许对流的模型中用深度学习诊断风暴模式","authors":"R. Sobash, D. Gagne, Charlie Becker, D. Ahijevych, Gabrielle Gantos, C. Schwartz","doi":"10.1175/mwr-d-22-0342.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nWhile convective storm mode is explicitly depicted in convection-allowing model (CAM) output, subjectively diagnosing mode in large volumes of CAM forecasts can be burdensome. In this work, four machine learning (ML) models were trained to probabilistically classify CAM storms into one of three modes: supercells, quasi-linear convective systems, and disorganized convection. The four ML models included a dense neural network (DNN), logistic regression (LR), a convolutional neural network (CNN) and semi-supervised CNN-Gaussian mixture model (GMM). The DNN, CNN, and LR were trained with a set of hand-labeled CAM storms, while the semi-supervised GMM used updraft helicity and storm size to generate clusters which were then hand labeled. When evaluated using storms withheld from training, the four classifiers had similar ability to discriminate between modes, but the GMM had worse calibration. The DNN and LR had similar objective performance to the CNN, suggesting that CNN-based methods may not be needed for mode classification tasks. The mode classifications from all four classifiers successfully approximated the known climatology of modes in the U.S., including a maximum in supercell occurrence in the U.S. Central Plains. Further, the modes also occurred in environments recognized to support the three different storm morphologies. Finally, storm mode provided useful information about hazard type, e.g., storm reports were most likely with supercells, further supporting the efficacy of the classifiers. Future applications, including the use of objective CAM mode classifications as a novel predictor in ML systems, could potentially lead to improved forecasts of convective hazards.","PeriodicalId":18824,"journal":{"name":"Monthly Weather Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnosing Storm Mode with Deep Learning in Convection-Allowing Models\",\"authors\":\"R. Sobash, D. Gagne, Charlie Becker, D. Ahijevych, Gabrielle Gantos, C. Schwartz\",\"doi\":\"10.1175/mwr-d-22-0342.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nWhile convective storm mode is explicitly depicted in convection-allowing model (CAM) output, subjectively diagnosing mode in large volumes of CAM forecasts can be burdensome. In this work, four machine learning (ML) models were trained to probabilistically classify CAM storms into one of three modes: supercells, quasi-linear convective systems, and disorganized convection. The four ML models included a dense neural network (DNN), logistic regression (LR), a convolutional neural network (CNN) and semi-supervised CNN-Gaussian mixture model (GMM). The DNN, CNN, and LR were trained with a set of hand-labeled CAM storms, while the semi-supervised GMM used updraft helicity and storm size to generate clusters which were then hand labeled. When evaluated using storms withheld from training, the four classifiers had similar ability to discriminate between modes, but the GMM had worse calibration. The DNN and LR had similar objective performance to the CNN, suggesting that CNN-based methods may not be needed for mode classification tasks. The mode classifications from all four classifiers successfully approximated the known climatology of modes in the U.S., including a maximum in supercell occurrence in the U.S. Central Plains. Further, the modes also occurred in environments recognized to support the three different storm morphologies. Finally, storm mode provided useful information about hazard type, e.g., storm reports were most likely with supercells, further supporting the efficacy of the classifiers. Future applications, including the use of objective CAM mode classifications as a novel predictor in ML systems, could potentially lead to improved forecasts of convective hazards.\",\"PeriodicalId\":18824,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Monthly Weather Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Monthly Weather Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1175/mwr-d-22-0342.1\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"METEOROLOGY & ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Monthly Weather Review","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1175/mwr-d-22-0342.1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"METEOROLOGY & ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Diagnosing Storm Mode with Deep Learning in Convection-Allowing Models
While convective storm mode is explicitly depicted in convection-allowing model (CAM) output, subjectively diagnosing mode in large volumes of CAM forecasts can be burdensome. In this work, four machine learning (ML) models were trained to probabilistically classify CAM storms into one of three modes: supercells, quasi-linear convective systems, and disorganized convection. The four ML models included a dense neural network (DNN), logistic regression (LR), a convolutional neural network (CNN) and semi-supervised CNN-Gaussian mixture model (GMM). The DNN, CNN, and LR were trained with a set of hand-labeled CAM storms, while the semi-supervised GMM used updraft helicity and storm size to generate clusters which were then hand labeled. When evaluated using storms withheld from training, the four classifiers had similar ability to discriminate between modes, but the GMM had worse calibration. The DNN and LR had similar objective performance to the CNN, suggesting that CNN-based methods may not be needed for mode classification tasks. The mode classifications from all four classifiers successfully approximated the known climatology of modes in the U.S., including a maximum in supercell occurrence in the U.S. Central Plains. Further, the modes also occurred in environments recognized to support the three different storm morphologies. Finally, storm mode provided useful information about hazard type, e.g., storm reports were most likely with supercells, further supporting the efficacy of the classifiers. Future applications, including the use of objective CAM mode classifications as a novel predictor in ML systems, could potentially lead to improved forecasts of convective hazards.
期刊介绍:
Monthly Weather Review (MWR) (ISSN: 0027-0644; eISSN: 1520-0493) publishes research relevant to the analysis and prediction of observed atmospheric circulations and physics, including technique development, data assimilation, model validation, and relevant case studies. This research includes numerical and data assimilation techniques that apply to the atmosphere and/or ocean environments. MWR also addresses phenomena having seasonal and subseasonal time scales.