Cargando…
Forecast of Winter Precipitation Type Based on Machine Learning Method
A winter precipitation-type prediction is a challenging problem due to the complexity in the physical mechanisms and computability in numerical modeling. In this study, we introduce a new method of precipitation-type prediction based on the machine learning approach LightGBM. The precipitation-type...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9858138/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36673279 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/e25010138 |
Sumario: | A winter precipitation-type prediction is a challenging problem due to the complexity in the physical mechanisms and computability in numerical modeling. In this study, we introduce a new method of precipitation-type prediction based on the machine learning approach LightGBM. The precipitation-type records of the in situ observations collected from 32 national weather stations in northern China during 1997–2018 are used as the labels. The features are selected from the conventional meteorological data of the corresponding hourly reanalysis data ERA5. The evaluation results of the model performance reflect that randomly sampled validation data will lead to an illusion of a better model performance. Extreme climate background conditions will reduce the prediction accuracy of the predictive model. A feature importance analysis illustrates that the features of the surrounding area with a –12 h offset time have a higher impact on the ground precipitation types. The exploration of the predictability of our model reveals the feasibility of using the analysis data to predict future precipitation types. We use the ECMWF precipitation-type (ECPT) forecast products as the benchmark to compare with our machine learning precipitation-type (MLPT) predictions. The overall accuracy (ACC) and Heidke skill score (HSS) of the MLPT are 0.83 and 0.69, respectively, which are considerably higher than the 0.78 and 0.59 of the ECPT. For stations at elevations below 800 m, the overall performance of the MLPT is even better. |
---|