Opinion: Optimizing climate models with process knowledge, resolution, and artificial intelligence
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Accelerated progress in climate modeling is urgently needed for proactive and effective climate change adaptation. The central challenge lies in accurately representing processes that are small in scale yet climatically important, such as turbulence and cloud formation. These processes will not be explicitly resolvable for the foreseeable future, necessitating the use of parameterizations. We propose a balanced approach that leverages the strengths of traditional process-based parameterizations and contemporary artificial intelligence (AI)-based methods to model subgrid-scale processes. This strategy employs AI to derive data-driven closure functions from both observational and simulated data, integrated within parameterizations that encode system knowledge and conservation laws. In addition, increasing the resolution to resolve a larger fraction of small-scale processes can aid progress toward improved and interpretable climate predictions outside the observed climate distribution. However, currently feasible horizontal resolutions are limited to O (10 km) because higher resolutions would impede the creation of the ensembles that are needed for model calibration and uncertainty quantification, for sampling atmospheric and oceanic internal variability, and for broadly exploring and quantifying climate risks. By synergizing decades of scientific development with advanced AI techniques, our approach aims to significantly boost the accuracy, interpretability, and trustworthiness of climate predictions.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The results provide strong evidence for the disputed hypothesis that learning to predict short-term weather is an effective way to tune parameterizations for climate.
“Our results provide strong evidence for the disputed hypothesis37–39 that learning to predict short-term weather is an effective way to tune parameterizations for climate.”
From Neural general circulation models for weather and climate (2024) · cites this paper as [39]
Cites
Atmospheric and Oceanic Fluid Dynamics: Fundamentals and Large-scale Circulation
Vallis, G. K. (2006) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511790447 · Cited by 1,599 · see citing works
Towards neural Earth system modelling by integrating artificial intelligence in Earth system science
Irrgang, C., Boers, N., Sonnewald, M., Barnes, E. A., Kadow, C., Staneva, J., & Saynisch-Wagner, J. (2021) · Nature Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s42256-021-00374-3 · Cited by 308 · see citing works
Data‐Driven Equation Discovery of Ocean Mesoscale Closures
Zanna, L., & Bolton, T. (2020) · Geophysical Research Letters · doi:10.1029/2020gl088376 · Cited by 259 · see citing works
Couvreux, F., Hourdin, F., Williamson, D., Roehrig, R., Volodina, V., Villefranque, N., Rio, C., Audouin, O., Salter, J., Bazile, E., et al. (2021) · Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems · doi:10.1029/2020ms002217 · Cited by 121 · see citing works
Hourdin, F., Williamson, D., Rio, C., Couvreux, F., Roehrig, R., Villefranque, N., Musat, I., Fairhead, L., Diallo, F. B., & Volodina, V. (2021) · Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems · doi:10.1029/2020ms002225 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Hourdin, F., Ferster, B., Deshayes, J., Mignot, J., Musat, I., & Williamson, D. (2023) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.adf2758 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Neural general circulation models for weather and climate
Kochkov, D., Yuval, J., Langmore, I., Norgaard, P., Smith, J., Mooers, G., Klöwer, M., Lottes, J., Rasp, S., Düben, P., et al. (2024) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07744-y · Cited by 454 · see citing works
“However, we will probably need alternative training strategies 38,39 to learn important processes for climate with subtle impacts on weather timescales, such as a cloud feedback.”
BackgroundResult
- Authors
- Schneider, T., Leung, L. R., & Wills, R. C. J.
- Affiliations
- California Institute of Technology (US)
- California Institute of Technology (Pasadena, United States of America)
- ETH Zurich (CH)
- Corresponding author
- Schneider, Tapio
- Venue
- Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
- Publisher
- Copernicus GmbH
- Published
- 2024-06-19
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 7041-7062
- ISSN
- 1680-7316 (ISSN-L)
- 1680-7324
- OpenAlex
- W4399809729
- Cited by
- 53
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 21 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 8
- FWCI
- 9.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Atmospheric chemistry and physics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Repository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- ETH Zürich Research Collection
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (AGS-1835860)
- Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung (PCEFP2_203376)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Meteorological Phenomena and Simulations
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Climate variability and models
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Atmospheric aerosols and clouds
- Keywords
- subgrid-scale processes, parameterization, turbulent flow, cloud formation, model resolution, climate change adaptation, uncertainty quantification, model calibration
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