PreprintCited by 369Meteorological Phenomena and SimulationsHydrological Forecasting Using AITraffic Prediction and Management Techniques

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

FuXi: A cascade machine learning forecasting system for 15-day global weather forecast

Open access
Li, Hao, Chen, Lei, Zhong, Xiaohui, Zhang, Feng, Cheng, Yuan, Xu, Yinghui, Qi, Yuan·2023·npj Climate and Atmospheric Science

Preprint — published as 10.1038/s41612-023-00512-1 · Paper page

Abstract

Over the past few years, due to the rapid development of machine learning (ML) models for weather forecasting, state-of-the-art ML models have shown superior performance compared to the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF)'s high-resolution forecst(HRES) in 10-day forecasts at a spatial resolution of 0.25°. However, the challenge remains to perform comparably to the ECMWF ensemble mean (EM) in 15-day forecasts. Previous studies have demonstrated the importance of mitigating the accumulation of forecast errors for effective long-term forecasts. Despite numerous efforts to reduce accumulation errors, including autoregressive multi-time step loss, using a single model is found to be insufficient to achieve optimal performance in both short and long lead times. Therefore, we present FuXi, a cascaded ML weather forecasting system that provides 15-day global forecasts with a temporal resolution of 6 hours and a spatial resolution of 0.25°. FuXi is developed using 39 years of the ECMWF ERA5 reanalysis dataset. The performance evaluation, based on latitude-weighted root mean square error (RMSE) and anomaly correlation coefficient (ACC), demonstrates that FuXi has comparable forecast performance to ECMWF EM in 15-day forecasts, making FuXi the first ML-based weather forecasting system to accomplish this achievement.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.21203/rs.3.rs-3081705/v1

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Li, H., Chen, L., Zhong, X., Zhang, F., Cheng, Y., Xu, Y., & Qi, Y.
Affiliations
Fudan University (CN)
Corresponding author
  • Li, Hao
  • Qi, Yuan
Venue
npj Climate and Atmospheric Science
Published
2023-07-12
Volume
6
Issue
1
ISSN
2397-3722 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4388728292
Cited by
369
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 135 · 2025: 154 · 2024: 77 · 2023: 3
FWCI
40.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • npj Climate and Atmospheric Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Meteorological Phenomena and Simulations
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Hydrological Forecasting Using AI
  • Social Sciences › Transportation › Traffic Prediction and Management Techniques
Keywords
ECMWF ensemble, ERA5 reanalysis, 2 m air temperature, forecast uncertainty, initial perturbations, parameter perturbation, long lead time forecasting

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review