Assessment of High‐Resolution Dynamical and Machine Learning Models for Prediction of Sea Ice Concentration in a Regional Application

In this study, the potential for sea ice concentration prediction using machine‐learning methods is investigated. Three different sea ice prediction models are compared: one high‐resolution dynamical assimilative model and two statistical machine‐learning models. The properties of all three models a...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans
Main Authors: Fritzner, Sindre Markus, Graversen, Rune, Christensen, Kai Håkon
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: American Geophysical Union (AGU) 2020
Subjects:
Online Access:https://hdl.handle.net/10037/19736
https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JC016277
id ftunivtroemsoe:oai:munin.uit.no:10037/19736
record_format openpolar
spelling ftunivtroemsoe:oai:munin.uit.no:10037/19736 2023-07-16T03:55:33+02:00 Assessment of High‐Resolution Dynamical and Machine Learning Models for Prediction of Sea Ice Concentration in a Regional Application Fritzner, Sindre Markus Graversen, Rune Christensen, Kai Håkon 2020-10-17 https://hdl.handle.net/10037/19736 https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JC016277 eng eng American Geophysical Union (AGU) Journal of Geophysical Research (JGR): Oceans info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/RCN/SFI/237906/Norway/Centre for Integrated Remote Sensing and Forecasting for Arctic Operations/CIRFA/ Fritzner SM, Graversen R, Christensen KH. Assessment of High‐Resolution Dynamical and Machine Learning Models for Prediction of Sea Ice Concentration in a Regional Application. Journal of Geophysical Research (JGR): Oceans. 2020;125(11):1-23 FRIDAID 1843517 doi:10.1029/2020JC016277 2169-9275 2169-9291 https://hdl.handle.net/10037/19736 openAccess ©2020. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved. VDP::Mathematics and natural science: 400::Physics: 430 VDP::Matematikk og Naturvitenskap: 400::Fysikk: 430 Journal article Tidsskriftartikkel submittedVersion 2020 ftunivtroemsoe https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JC016277 2023-06-28T23:06:34Z In this study, the potential for sea ice concentration prediction using machine‐learning methods is investigated. Three different sea ice prediction models are compared: one high‐resolution dynamical assimilative model and two statistical machine‐learning models. The properties of all three models are explored, and the quality of their forecasts is compared. The dynamical model is a state‐of‐the‐art coupled ocean and sea ice ensemble‐prediction system with assimilation. The observations assimilated are high‐resolution sea ice concentration from synthetic aperture radar (SAR) and sea surface temperature from infrared instruments. The machine‐learning prediction models are a fully convolutional network and a k ‐nearest neighbors method. These methods use several variables as input for the prediction: sea ice concentration, sea surface temperature, and 2‐m air temperature. Earlier studies have applied machine‐learning approaches primarily for seasonal ice forecast. Here we focus on short‐term predictions with a length of 1–4 weeks, which are of high interest for marine operations. The goal is to predict the future state of the sea ice using the same categories as traditional ice charts. The machine‐learning forecasts were compared to persistence, which is the assumption that the sea ice does not change over the forecasting period. The machine‐learning forecasts were found to improve upon persistence in periods of substantial change. In addition, compared to the dynamical model, the k ‐nearest neighbor algorithm was found to improve upon the 7‐day forecast during a period of small sea ice variations. The fully convolutional network provided similar quality as the dynamical forecast. The study shows that there is a potential for sea ice predictions using machine‐learning methods. Article in Journal/Newspaper Arctic Sea ice University of Tromsø: Munin Open Research Archive Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans 125 11
institution Open Polar
collection University of Tromsø: Munin Open Research Archive
op_collection_id ftunivtroemsoe
language English
topic VDP::Mathematics and natural science: 400::Physics: 430
VDP::Matematikk og Naturvitenskap: 400::Fysikk: 430
spellingShingle VDP::Mathematics and natural science: 400::Physics: 430
VDP::Matematikk og Naturvitenskap: 400::Fysikk: 430
Fritzner, Sindre Markus
Graversen, Rune
Christensen, Kai Håkon
Assessment of High‐Resolution Dynamical and Machine Learning Models for Prediction of Sea Ice Concentration in a Regional Application
topic_facet VDP::Mathematics and natural science: 400::Physics: 430
VDP::Matematikk og Naturvitenskap: 400::Fysikk: 430
description In this study, the potential for sea ice concentration prediction using machine‐learning methods is investigated. Three different sea ice prediction models are compared: one high‐resolution dynamical assimilative model and two statistical machine‐learning models. The properties of all three models are explored, and the quality of their forecasts is compared. The dynamical model is a state‐of‐the‐art coupled ocean and sea ice ensemble‐prediction system with assimilation. The observations assimilated are high‐resolution sea ice concentration from synthetic aperture radar (SAR) and sea surface temperature from infrared instruments. The machine‐learning prediction models are a fully convolutional network and a k ‐nearest neighbors method. These methods use several variables as input for the prediction: sea ice concentration, sea surface temperature, and 2‐m air temperature. Earlier studies have applied machine‐learning approaches primarily for seasonal ice forecast. Here we focus on short‐term predictions with a length of 1–4 weeks, which are of high interest for marine operations. The goal is to predict the future state of the sea ice using the same categories as traditional ice charts. The machine‐learning forecasts were compared to persistence, which is the assumption that the sea ice does not change over the forecasting period. The machine‐learning forecasts were found to improve upon persistence in periods of substantial change. In addition, compared to the dynamical model, the k ‐nearest neighbor algorithm was found to improve upon the 7‐day forecast during a period of small sea ice variations. The fully convolutional network provided similar quality as the dynamical forecast. The study shows that there is a potential for sea ice predictions using machine‐learning methods.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Fritzner, Sindre Markus
Graversen, Rune
Christensen, Kai Håkon
author_facet Fritzner, Sindre Markus
Graversen, Rune
Christensen, Kai Håkon
author_sort Fritzner, Sindre Markus
title Assessment of High‐Resolution Dynamical and Machine Learning Models for Prediction of Sea Ice Concentration in a Regional Application
title_short Assessment of High‐Resolution Dynamical and Machine Learning Models for Prediction of Sea Ice Concentration in a Regional Application
title_full Assessment of High‐Resolution Dynamical and Machine Learning Models for Prediction of Sea Ice Concentration in a Regional Application
title_fullStr Assessment of High‐Resolution Dynamical and Machine Learning Models for Prediction of Sea Ice Concentration in a Regional Application
title_full_unstemmed Assessment of High‐Resolution Dynamical and Machine Learning Models for Prediction of Sea Ice Concentration in a Regional Application
title_sort assessment of high‐resolution dynamical and machine learning models for prediction of sea ice concentration in a regional application
publisher American Geophysical Union (AGU)
publishDate 2020
url https://hdl.handle.net/10037/19736
https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JC016277
genre Arctic
Sea ice
genre_facet Arctic
Sea ice
op_relation Journal of Geophysical Research (JGR): Oceans
info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/RCN/SFI/237906/Norway/Centre for Integrated Remote Sensing and Forecasting for Arctic Operations/CIRFA/
Fritzner SM, Graversen R, Christensen KH. Assessment of High‐Resolution Dynamical and Machine Learning Models for Prediction of Sea Ice Concentration in a Regional Application. Journal of Geophysical Research (JGR): Oceans. 2020;125(11):1-23
FRIDAID 1843517
doi:10.1029/2020JC016277
2169-9275
2169-9291
https://hdl.handle.net/10037/19736
op_rights openAccess
©2020. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.
op_doi https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JC016277
container_title Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans
container_volume 125
container_issue 11
_version_ 1771541774100070400