# Machine Learning Climate Model Dynamics: Offline versus Online Performance

Preprint · Noah D. Brenowitz, Brian Henn, Jeremy McGibbon, Spencer K. Clark, Anna Kwa, W. Andre Perkins, Oliver Watt-Meyer, Christopher S. Bretherton

- Archive id: arxiv:2011.03081
- Published: 2020-11-05
- arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2011.03081
- Source URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2011.03081
- PDF: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2011.03081
- Provenance: arxiv

## Abstract

Climate models are complicated software systems that approximate atmospheric and oceanic fluid mechanics at a coarse spatial resolution. Typical climate forecasts only explicitly resolve processes larger than 100 km and approximate any process occurring below this scale (e.g. thunderstorms) using so-called parametrizations. Machine learning could improve upon the accuracy of some traditional physical parametrizations by learning from so-called global cloud-resolving models. We compare the performance of two machine learning models, random forests (RF) and neural networks (NNs), at parametrizing the aggregate effect of moist physics in a 3 km resolution global simulation with an atmospheric model. The NN outperforms the RF when evaluated offline on a testing dataset. However, when the ML models are coupled to an atmospheric model run at 200 km resolution, the NN-assisted simulation crashes with 7 days, while the RF-assisted simulations remain stable. Both runs produce more accurate weather forecasts than a baseline configuration, but globally averaged climate variables drift over longer timescales.

_Abstract reproduced under CC0-1.0 (arXiv descriptive metadata)._

---
Space Kitty Archive · https://space-kitty.com · API: https://space-kitty.com/api/v1 · MCP: https://space-kitty.com/mcp · Premium: $0.20/request via x402 (Base Sepolia (testnet)). Metadata: arXiv (CC0), OpenAlex (CC0), Europe PMC (CC BY/CC0 works), ClinicalTrials.gov.