Reducing Southern Ocean Shortwave Radiation Errors in the ERA5 Reanalysis with Machine Learning and 25 Years of Surface Observations
Earth system models struggle to simulate clouds and their radiative effects over the Southern Ocean, partly due to a lack of measurements and targeted cloud microphysics knowledge. We have evaluated biases of downwelling shortwave radiation in the ERA5 climate reanalysis using 25 years (1995–2019) o...
| Published in: | Artificial Intelligence for the Earth Systems |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , |
| Language: | unknown |
| Published: |
2023
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1973382 https://www.osti.gov/biblio/1973382 https://doi.org/10.1175/aies-d-22-0044.1 |
| Summary: | Earth system models struggle to simulate clouds and their radiative effects over the Southern Ocean, partly due to a lack of measurements and targeted cloud microphysics knowledge. We have evaluated biases of downwelling shortwave radiation in the ERA5 climate reanalysis using 25 years (1995–2019) of summertime surface measurements, collected on the Research and Supply Vessel (RSV) Aurora Australis, the Research Vessel (R/V) Investigator, and at Macquarie Island. During October–March daylight hours, the ERA5 simulation of SW down exhibited large errors (mean bias = 54 W m -2 , mean absolute error = 82 W m -2 , root-mean-square error = 132 W m -2 , and R 2 = 0.71). To determine whether we could improve these statistics, we bypassed ERA5’s radiative transfer model for SW down with machine learning–based models using a number of ERA5’s gridscale meteorological variables as predictors. These models were trained and tested with the surface measurements of SW down using a 10-fold shuffle split. An extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) and a random forest–based model setup had the best performance relative to ERA5, both with a near complete reduction of the mean bias error, a decrease in the mean absolute error and root-mean-square error by 25% ± 3%, and an increase in the R 2 value of 5% ± 1% over the 10 splits. Large improvements occurred at higher latitudes and cyclone cold sectors, where ERA5 performed most poorly. We further interpret our methods using Shapley additive explanations. Our results indicate that data-driven techniques could have an important role in simulating surface radiation fluxes and in improving reanalysis products. |
|---|