Deep Learning Regional Climate Model Emulators: A Comparison of Two Downscaling Training Frameworks

Regional climate models (RCMs) have a high computational cost due to their higher spatial resolution compared to global climate models (GCMs). Therefore, various downscaling approaches have been developed as a surrogate for the dynamical downscaling of GCMs. This study assesses the potential of usin...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of advances in modeling earth systems 2023-06, Vol.15 (6), p.n/a
Hauptverfasser: Meer, Marijn, Roda Husman, Sophie, Lhermitte, Stef
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page n/a
container_issue 6
container_start_page
container_title Journal of advances in modeling earth systems
container_volume 15
creator Meer, Marijn
Roda Husman, Sophie
Lhermitte, Stef
description Regional climate models (RCMs) have a high computational cost due to their higher spatial resolution compared to global climate models (GCMs). Therefore, various downscaling approaches have been developed as a surrogate for the dynamical downscaling of GCMs. This study assesses the potential of using a cost‐efficient machine learning alternative to dynamical downscaling by using the example case study of emulating surface mass balance (SMB) over the Antarctic Peninsula. More specifically, we determine the impact of the training framework by comparing two training scenarios: (a) a perfect and (b) an imperfect model framework. In the perfect model framework, the RCM‐emulator learns only the downscaling function; therefore, it was trained with upscaled RCM (UPRCM) features at GCM resolution. This emulator accurately reproduced SMB when evaluated on UPRCM, but its predictions on GCM data conserved RCM‐GCM inconsistencies and led to underestimation. In the imperfect model framework, the RCM‐emulator was trained with GCM features and downscaled the GCM while exposed to RCM‐GCM inconsistencies. This emulator predicted SMB close to the truth, showing it learned the underlying inconsistencies and dynamics. Our results suggest that a deep learning RCM‐emulator can learn the proper GCM to RCM downscaling function while working directly with GCM data. Furthermore, the RCM‐emulator presents a significant computational gain compared to an RCM simulation. We conclude that machine learning emulators can be applied to produce fast and fine‐scaled predictions of RCM simulations from GCM data. Plain Language Summary Over the last century, climate scientists have tried to deepen their understanding of the behavior of climate processes through two types of computer climate simulations: global (GCMs) and regional (RCMs) climate models. GCMs cover the whole planet but do not contain fine spatial details, whereas RCMs provide highly detailed information but cover small areas and come at a high additional computational cost. Therefore, we imitated regional models from global models using machine learning to facilitate their faster development. To test our machine learning framework, we focused on the Antarctic Peninsula and aimed to reproduce the surface mass balance (SMB) of ice formation and loss. We trained our model to learn the relationship between a group of low‐resolution images of climate variables and a high‐resolution image from SMB images in the same region. Our results
doi_str_mv 10.1029/2022MS003593
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2830046891</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2830046891</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2752-3e28c7163c739ec1cb3e2cdcfb2bb519e779380dff86aa00210e7935e0b7acc3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1Lw0AURQdRsFZ3_oABt0bfzDSTjLuSpn7QImj2YTJ9KalJJs60hP57U-uiK1fvcTkcuJeQWwYPDLh65MD58hNAhEqckRFTEx7wiZTnJ_8lufJ-AyCl5OGImBliRxeoXVu1a_qB68q2uqZJXTV6i3RpV1jTtNnVemudf6JTmtim067ytqW2pFlv6cz2rTe6Phgyp6tf1dzpBnvrvvw1uSh17fHm745JNk-z5CVYvD-_JtNFYHgU8kAgj03EpDCRUGiYKYbErExZ8KIImcIoUiKGVVnGUmsAzgCHJEQoIm2MGJO7o7Zz9nuHfptv7M4NZXzOYwEwkbFiA3V_pIyz3jss884NVd0-Z5AfVsxPVxxwccT7qsb9v2z-Nl2mnMWKix9t5nOH</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2830046891</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Deep Learning Regional Climate Model Emulators: A Comparison of Two Downscaling Training Frameworks</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Collection</source><source>Wiley Online Library</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>EZB*</source><creator>Meer, Marijn ; Roda Husman, Sophie ; Lhermitte, Stef</creator><creatorcontrib>Meer, Marijn ; Roda Husman, Sophie ; Lhermitte, Stef</creatorcontrib><description>Regional climate models (RCMs) have a high computational cost due to their higher spatial resolution compared to global climate models (GCMs). Therefore, various downscaling approaches have been developed as a surrogate for the dynamical downscaling of GCMs. This study assesses the potential of using a cost‐efficient machine learning alternative to dynamical downscaling by using the example case study of emulating surface mass balance (SMB) over the Antarctic Peninsula. More specifically, we determine the impact of the training framework by comparing two training scenarios: (a) a perfect and (b) an imperfect model framework. In the perfect model framework, the RCM‐emulator learns only the downscaling function; therefore, it was trained with upscaled RCM (UPRCM) features at GCM resolution. This emulator accurately reproduced SMB when evaluated on UPRCM, but its predictions on GCM data conserved RCM‐GCM inconsistencies and led to underestimation. In the imperfect model framework, the RCM‐emulator was trained with GCM features and downscaled the GCM while exposed to RCM‐GCM inconsistencies. This emulator predicted SMB close to the truth, showing it learned the underlying inconsistencies and dynamics. Our results suggest that a deep learning RCM‐emulator can learn the proper GCM to RCM downscaling function while working directly with GCM data. Furthermore, the RCM‐emulator presents a significant computational gain compared to an RCM simulation. We conclude that machine learning emulators can be applied to produce fast and fine‐scaled predictions of RCM simulations from GCM data. Plain Language Summary Over the last century, climate scientists have tried to deepen their understanding of the behavior of climate processes through two types of computer climate simulations: global (GCMs) and regional (RCMs) climate models. GCMs cover the whole planet but do not contain fine spatial details, whereas RCMs provide highly detailed information but cover small areas and come at a high additional computational cost. Therefore, we imitated regional models from global models using machine learning to facilitate their faster development. To test our machine learning framework, we focused on the Antarctic Peninsula and aimed to reproduce the surface mass balance (SMB) of ice formation and loss. We trained our model to learn the relationship between a group of low‐resolution images of climate variables and a high‐resolution image from SMB images in the same region. Our results show that the machine learning model is fast and could recreate regional images of ice sheet processes from global data almost identical to existing on‐site observations. This is a good start for further usage of machine learning emulators. In conclusion, we can make fast and detailed reproductions of SMB processes at regional scales from globally accessible climate data using machine learning. Key Points We developed a computationally fast machine learning emulator to downscale a global climate model (GCM) to regional resolution The emulator reproduces regional high‐resolution surface mass balance predictions over the Antarctic Peninsula from a GCM The imperfect model framework outperforms the perfect model framework in the application success of the deep learning emulator</description><identifier>ISSN: 1942-2466</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1942-2466</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1029/2022MS003593</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington: John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>Antarctica ; Case studies ; Climate ; Climate change ; Climate models ; Frameworks ; GCM downscaling ; Global climate ; Ice sheets ; Machine learning ; Mass balance ; Modelling ; Precipitation ; RCM‐emulator ; Regional climate models ; Regional climates ; Simulation ; Training ; Variables</subject><ispartof>Journal of advances in modeling earth systems, 2023-06, Vol.15 (6), p.n/a</ispartof><rights>2023 The Authors. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Geophysical Union.</rights><rights>2023. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2752-3e28c7163c739ec1cb3e2cdcfb2bb519e779380dff86aa00210e7935e0b7acc3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2752-3e28c7163c739ec1cb3e2cdcfb2bb519e779380dff86aa00210e7935e0b7acc3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-8830-9894 ; 0000-0002-7604-4494 ; 0000-0002-1622-0177</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1029%2F2022MS003593$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029%2F2022MS003593$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,860,1411,11541,27901,27902,45550,45551,46027,46451</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Meer, Marijn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roda Husman, Sophie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lhermitte, Stef</creatorcontrib><title>Deep Learning Regional Climate Model Emulators: A Comparison of Two Downscaling Training Frameworks</title><title>Journal of advances in modeling earth systems</title><description>Regional climate models (RCMs) have a high computational cost due to their higher spatial resolution compared to global climate models (GCMs). Therefore, various downscaling approaches have been developed as a surrogate for the dynamical downscaling of GCMs. This study assesses the potential of using a cost‐efficient machine learning alternative to dynamical downscaling by using the example case study of emulating surface mass balance (SMB) over the Antarctic Peninsula. More specifically, we determine the impact of the training framework by comparing two training scenarios: (a) a perfect and (b) an imperfect model framework. In the perfect model framework, the RCM‐emulator learns only the downscaling function; therefore, it was trained with upscaled RCM (UPRCM) features at GCM resolution. This emulator accurately reproduced SMB when evaluated on UPRCM, but its predictions on GCM data conserved RCM‐GCM inconsistencies and led to underestimation. In the imperfect model framework, the RCM‐emulator was trained with GCM features and downscaled the GCM while exposed to RCM‐GCM inconsistencies. This emulator predicted SMB close to the truth, showing it learned the underlying inconsistencies and dynamics. Our results suggest that a deep learning RCM‐emulator can learn the proper GCM to RCM downscaling function while working directly with GCM data. Furthermore, the RCM‐emulator presents a significant computational gain compared to an RCM simulation. We conclude that machine learning emulators can be applied to produce fast and fine‐scaled predictions of RCM simulations from GCM data. Plain Language Summary Over the last century, climate scientists have tried to deepen their understanding of the behavior of climate processes through two types of computer climate simulations: global (GCMs) and regional (RCMs) climate models. GCMs cover the whole planet but do not contain fine spatial details, whereas RCMs provide highly detailed information but cover small areas and come at a high additional computational cost. Therefore, we imitated regional models from global models using machine learning to facilitate their faster development. To test our machine learning framework, we focused on the Antarctic Peninsula and aimed to reproduce the surface mass balance (SMB) of ice formation and loss. We trained our model to learn the relationship between a group of low‐resolution images of climate variables and a high‐resolution image from SMB images in the same region. Our results show that the machine learning model is fast and could recreate regional images of ice sheet processes from global data almost identical to existing on‐site observations. This is a good start for further usage of machine learning emulators. In conclusion, we can make fast and detailed reproductions of SMB processes at regional scales from globally accessible climate data using machine learning. Key Points We developed a computationally fast machine learning emulator to downscale a global climate model (GCM) to regional resolution The emulator reproduces regional high‐resolution surface mass balance predictions over the Antarctic Peninsula from a GCM The imperfect model framework outperforms the perfect model framework in the application success of the deep learning emulator</description><subject>Antarctica</subject><subject>Case studies</subject><subject>Climate</subject><subject>Climate change</subject><subject>Climate models</subject><subject>Frameworks</subject><subject>GCM downscaling</subject><subject>Global climate</subject><subject>Ice sheets</subject><subject>Machine learning</subject><subject>Mass balance</subject><subject>Modelling</subject><subject>Precipitation</subject><subject>RCM‐emulator</subject><subject>Regional climate models</subject><subject>Regional climates</subject><subject>Simulation</subject><subject>Training</subject><subject>Variables</subject><issn>1942-2466</issn><issn>1942-2466</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1Lw0AURQdRsFZ3_oABt0bfzDSTjLuSpn7QImj2YTJ9KalJJs60hP57U-uiK1fvcTkcuJeQWwYPDLh65MD58hNAhEqckRFTEx7wiZTnJ_8lufJ-AyCl5OGImBliRxeoXVu1a_qB68q2uqZJXTV6i3RpV1jTtNnVemudf6JTmtim067ytqW2pFlv6cz2rTe6Phgyp6tf1dzpBnvrvvw1uSh17fHm745JNk-z5CVYvD-_JtNFYHgU8kAgj03EpDCRUGiYKYbErExZ8KIImcIoUiKGVVnGUmsAzgCHJEQoIm2MGJO7o7Zz9nuHfptv7M4NZXzOYwEwkbFiA3V_pIyz3jss884NVd0-Z5AfVsxPVxxwccT7qsb9v2z-Nl2mnMWKix9t5nOH</recordid><startdate>202306</startdate><enddate>202306</enddate><creator>Meer, Marijn</creator><creator>Roda Husman, Sophie</creator><creator>Lhermitte, Stef</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8830-9894</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7604-4494</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1622-0177</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202306</creationdate><title>Deep Learning Regional Climate Model Emulators: A Comparison of Two Downscaling Training Frameworks</title><author>Meer, Marijn ; Roda Husman, Sophie ; Lhermitte, Stef</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2752-3e28c7163c739ec1cb3e2cdcfb2bb519e779380dff86aa00210e7935e0b7acc3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Antarctica</topic><topic>Case studies</topic><topic>Climate</topic><topic>Climate change</topic><topic>Climate models</topic><topic>Frameworks</topic><topic>GCM downscaling</topic><topic>Global climate</topic><topic>Ice sheets</topic><topic>Machine learning</topic><topic>Mass balance</topic><topic>Modelling</topic><topic>Precipitation</topic><topic>RCM‐emulator</topic><topic>Regional climate models</topic><topic>Regional climates</topic><topic>Simulation</topic><topic>Training</topic><topic>Variables</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Meer, Marijn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roda Husman, Sophie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lhermitte, Stef</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Collection</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy &amp; Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><jtitle>Journal of advances in modeling earth systems</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Meer, Marijn</au><au>Roda Husman, Sophie</au><au>Lhermitte, Stef</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Deep Learning Regional Climate Model Emulators: A Comparison of Two Downscaling Training Frameworks</atitle><jtitle>Journal of advances in modeling earth systems</jtitle><date>2023-06</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>6</issue><epage>n/a</epage><issn>1942-2466</issn><eissn>1942-2466</eissn><abstract>Regional climate models (RCMs) have a high computational cost due to their higher spatial resolution compared to global climate models (GCMs). Therefore, various downscaling approaches have been developed as a surrogate for the dynamical downscaling of GCMs. This study assesses the potential of using a cost‐efficient machine learning alternative to dynamical downscaling by using the example case study of emulating surface mass balance (SMB) over the Antarctic Peninsula. More specifically, we determine the impact of the training framework by comparing two training scenarios: (a) a perfect and (b) an imperfect model framework. In the perfect model framework, the RCM‐emulator learns only the downscaling function; therefore, it was trained with upscaled RCM (UPRCM) features at GCM resolution. This emulator accurately reproduced SMB when evaluated on UPRCM, but its predictions on GCM data conserved RCM‐GCM inconsistencies and led to underestimation. In the imperfect model framework, the RCM‐emulator was trained with GCM features and downscaled the GCM while exposed to RCM‐GCM inconsistencies. This emulator predicted SMB close to the truth, showing it learned the underlying inconsistencies and dynamics. Our results suggest that a deep learning RCM‐emulator can learn the proper GCM to RCM downscaling function while working directly with GCM data. Furthermore, the RCM‐emulator presents a significant computational gain compared to an RCM simulation. We conclude that machine learning emulators can be applied to produce fast and fine‐scaled predictions of RCM simulations from GCM data. Plain Language Summary Over the last century, climate scientists have tried to deepen their understanding of the behavior of climate processes through two types of computer climate simulations: global (GCMs) and regional (RCMs) climate models. GCMs cover the whole planet but do not contain fine spatial details, whereas RCMs provide highly detailed information but cover small areas and come at a high additional computational cost. Therefore, we imitated regional models from global models using machine learning to facilitate their faster development. To test our machine learning framework, we focused on the Antarctic Peninsula and aimed to reproduce the surface mass balance (SMB) of ice formation and loss. We trained our model to learn the relationship between a group of low‐resolution images of climate variables and a high‐resolution image from SMB images in the same region. Our results show that the machine learning model is fast and could recreate regional images of ice sheet processes from global data almost identical to existing on‐site observations. This is a good start for further usage of machine learning emulators. In conclusion, we can make fast and detailed reproductions of SMB processes at regional scales from globally accessible climate data using machine learning. Key Points We developed a computationally fast machine learning emulator to downscale a global climate model (GCM) to regional resolution The emulator reproduces regional high‐resolution surface mass balance predictions over the Antarctic Peninsula from a GCM The imperfect model framework outperforms the perfect model framework in the application success of the deep learning emulator</abstract><cop>Washington</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</pub><doi>10.1029/2022MS003593</doi><tpages>22</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8830-9894</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7604-4494</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1622-0177</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1942-2466
ispartof Journal of advances in modeling earth systems, 2023-06, Vol.15 (6), p.n/a
issn 1942-2466
1942-2466
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2830046891
source Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Collection; Wiley Online Library; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; EZB*
subjects Antarctica
Case studies
Climate
Climate change
Climate models
Frameworks
GCM downscaling
Global climate
Ice sheets
Machine learning
Mass balance
Modelling
Precipitation
RCM‐emulator
Regional climate models
Regional climates
Simulation
Training
Variables
title Deep Learning Regional Climate Model Emulators: A Comparison of Two Downscaling Training Frameworks
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-11T19%3A54%3A15IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Deep%20Learning%20Regional%20Climate%20Model%20Emulators:%20A%20Comparison%20of%20Two%20Downscaling%20Training%20Frameworks&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20advances%20in%20modeling%20earth%20systems&rft.au=Meer,%20Marijn&rft.date=2023-06&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=6&rft.epage=n/a&rft.issn=1942-2466&rft.eissn=1942-2466&rft_id=info:doi/10.1029/2022MS003593&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2830046891%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2830046891&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true