A comparative assessment of the uncertainties of global surface ocean CO 2 estimates using a machine-learning ensemble (CSIR-ML6 version 2019a) – have we hit the wall?

Over the last decade, advanced statistical inference and machine learning have been used to fill the gaps in sparse surface ocean CO 2 measurements (Rödenbeck et al., 2015). The estimates from these methods have been used to constrain seasonal, interannual and decadal variability in sea–air CO 2 flu...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Geoscientific Model Development
Main Authors: L. Gregor, A. D. Lebehot, S. Kok, P. M. Scheel Monteiro
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: Copernicus Publications 2019
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-5113-2019
https://doaj.org/article/36ab773e37df46f28b71d0c8d5dc73a0
id ftdoajarticles:oai:doaj.org/article:36ab773e37df46f28b71d0c8d5dc73a0
record_format openpolar
spelling ftdoajarticles:oai:doaj.org/article:36ab773e37df46f28b71d0c8d5dc73a0 2023-05-15T18:25:58+02:00 A comparative assessment of the uncertainties of global surface ocean CO 2 estimates using a machine-learning ensemble (CSIR-ML6 version 2019a) – have we hit the wall? L. Gregor A. D. Lebehot S. Kok P. M. Scheel Monteiro 2019-12-01T00:00:00Z https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-5113-2019 https://doaj.org/article/36ab773e37df46f28b71d0c8d5dc73a0 EN eng Copernicus Publications https://www.geosci-model-dev.net/12/5113/2019/gmd-12-5113-2019.pdf https://doaj.org/toc/1991-959X https://doaj.org/toc/1991-9603 doi:10.5194/gmd-12-5113-2019 1991-959X 1991-9603 https://doaj.org/article/36ab773e37df46f28b71d0c8d5dc73a0 Geoscientific Model Development, Vol 12, Pp 5113-5136 (2019) Geology QE1-996.5 article 2019 ftdoajarticles https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-5113-2019 2022-12-31T10:42:22Z Over the last decade, advanced statistical inference and machine learning have been used to fill the gaps in sparse surface ocean CO 2 measurements (Rödenbeck et al., 2015). The estimates from these methods have been used to constrain seasonal, interannual and decadal variability in sea–air CO 2 fluxes and the drivers of these changes (Landschützer et al., 2015, 2016; Gregor et al., 2018). However, it is also becoming clear that these methods are converging towards a common bias and root mean square error (RMSE) boundary: “the wall”, which suggests that p CO 2 estimates are now limited by both data gaps and scale-sensitive observations. Here, we analyse this problem by introducing a new gap-filling method, an ensemble average of six machine-learning models (CSIR-ML6 version 2019a, Council for Scientific and Industrial Research – Machine Learning ensemble with Six members), where each model is constructed with a two-step clustering-regression approach. The ensemble average is then statistically compared to well-established methods. The ensemble average, CSIR-ML6, has an RMSE of 17.16 µ atm and bias of 0.89 µ atm when compared to a test dataset kept separate from training procedures. However, when validating our estimates with independent datasets, we find that our method improves only incrementally on other gap-filling methods. We investigate the differences between the methods to understand the extent of the limitations of gap-filling estimates of p CO 2 . We show that disagreement between methods in the South Atlantic, southeastern Pacific and parts of the Southern Ocean is too large to interpret the interannual variability with confidence. We conclude that improvements in surface ocean p CO 2 estimates will likely be incremental with the optimisation of gap-filling methods by (1) the inclusion of additional clustering and regression variables (e.g. eddy kinetic energy), (2) increasing the sampling resolution and (3) successfully incorporating p CO 2 estimates from alternate platforms (e.g. floats, gliders) ... Article in Journal/Newspaper Southern Ocean Directory of Open Access Journals: DOAJ Articles Southern Ocean Pacific Geoscientific Model Development 12 12 5113 5136
institution Open Polar
collection Directory of Open Access Journals: DOAJ Articles
op_collection_id ftdoajarticles
language English
topic Geology
QE1-996.5
spellingShingle Geology
QE1-996.5
L. Gregor
A. D. Lebehot
S. Kok
P. M. Scheel Monteiro
A comparative assessment of the uncertainties of global surface ocean CO 2 estimates using a machine-learning ensemble (CSIR-ML6 version 2019a) – have we hit the wall?
topic_facet Geology
QE1-996.5
description Over the last decade, advanced statistical inference and machine learning have been used to fill the gaps in sparse surface ocean CO 2 measurements (Rödenbeck et al., 2015). The estimates from these methods have been used to constrain seasonal, interannual and decadal variability in sea–air CO 2 fluxes and the drivers of these changes (Landschützer et al., 2015, 2016; Gregor et al., 2018). However, it is also becoming clear that these methods are converging towards a common bias and root mean square error (RMSE) boundary: “the wall”, which suggests that p CO 2 estimates are now limited by both data gaps and scale-sensitive observations. Here, we analyse this problem by introducing a new gap-filling method, an ensemble average of six machine-learning models (CSIR-ML6 version 2019a, Council for Scientific and Industrial Research – Machine Learning ensemble with Six members), where each model is constructed with a two-step clustering-regression approach. The ensemble average is then statistically compared to well-established methods. The ensemble average, CSIR-ML6, has an RMSE of 17.16 µ atm and bias of 0.89 µ atm when compared to a test dataset kept separate from training procedures. However, when validating our estimates with independent datasets, we find that our method improves only incrementally on other gap-filling methods. We investigate the differences between the methods to understand the extent of the limitations of gap-filling estimates of p CO 2 . We show that disagreement between methods in the South Atlantic, southeastern Pacific and parts of the Southern Ocean is too large to interpret the interannual variability with confidence. We conclude that improvements in surface ocean p CO 2 estimates will likely be incremental with the optimisation of gap-filling methods by (1) the inclusion of additional clustering and regression variables (e.g. eddy kinetic energy), (2) increasing the sampling resolution and (3) successfully incorporating p CO 2 estimates from alternate platforms (e.g. floats, gliders) ...
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author L. Gregor
A. D. Lebehot
S. Kok
P. M. Scheel Monteiro
author_facet L. Gregor
A. D. Lebehot
S. Kok
P. M. Scheel Monteiro
author_sort L. Gregor
title A comparative assessment of the uncertainties of global surface ocean CO 2 estimates using a machine-learning ensemble (CSIR-ML6 version 2019a) – have we hit the wall?
title_short A comparative assessment of the uncertainties of global surface ocean CO 2 estimates using a machine-learning ensemble (CSIR-ML6 version 2019a) – have we hit the wall?
title_full A comparative assessment of the uncertainties of global surface ocean CO 2 estimates using a machine-learning ensemble (CSIR-ML6 version 2019a) – have we hit the wall?
title_fullStr A comparative assessment of the uncertainties of global surface ocean CO 2 estimates using a machine-learning ensemble (CSIR-ML6 version 2019a) – have we hit the wall?
title_full_unstemmed A comparative assessment of the uncertainties of global surface ocean CO 2 estimates using a machine-learning ensemble (CSIR-ML6 version 2019a) – have we hit the wall?
title_sort comparative assessment of the uncertainties of global surface ocean co 2 estimates using a machine-learning ensemble (csir-ml6 version 2019a) – have we hit the wall?
publisher Copernicus Publications
publishDate 2019
url https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-5113-2019
https://doaj.org/article/36ab773e37df46f28b71d0c8d5dc73a0
geographic Southern Ocean
Pacific
geographic_facet Southern Ocean
Pacific
genre Southern Ocean
genre_facet Southern Ocean
op_source Geoscientific Model Development, Vol 12, Pp 5113-5136 (2019)
op_relation https://www.geosci-model-dev.net/12/5113/2019/gmd-12-5113-2019.pdf
https://doaj.org/toc/1991-959X
https://doaj.org/toc/1991-9603
doi:10.5194/gmd-12-5113-2019
1991-959X
1991-9603
https://doaj.org/article/36ab773e37df46f28b71d0c8d5dc73a0
op_doi https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-5113-2019
container_title Geoscientific Model Development
container_volume 12
container_issue 12
container_start_page 5113
op_container_end_page 5136
_version_ 1766207711583666176