HI
Uploaded byHisham Ihshaish
KEY, PDF381 views

Pdpta11 G-Ensemble for Meteorological Prediction Enhancement

This document discusses using an ensemble approach called Genetic Ensemble (G-Ensemble) to improve meteorological predictions. Meteorological models use initial conditions and physical parameterizations to predict variables over a domain at future time steps. However, predictions can be imperfect due to uncertainties in initial conditions and parameterizations. G-Ensemble aims to address this by running an ensemble of meteorological models with varied initial conditions and parameterizations to generate a collective prediction. The approach was tested on hurricane Katrina predictions, showing potential to improve forecast accuracy. Future work will further evaluate G-Ensemble on additional cases.

Embed presentation

Download to read offline
Genetic Ensemble (G-Ensemble) for Meteorological Prediction Enhancement Hisham Ihshaish, Ana Cortés, and Miquel A. Senar hisham@caos.uab.es, {ana.cortes,miquelangel.senar}@uab.es Computer Architecture & Operating Systems Department Barcelona, Spain The 2011 International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Processing Techniques and Applications (PDPTA´11) 18-21, July, 2011 Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
Presentation: • Introduction. • Meteorological Models. • Problem and Methodology. • Experimentation. • Conclusions and Future Work.
Introduction:
Introduction: • Why to predict? Is it that important?
Introduction: • Why to predict? Is it that important? Meteorological data is important and critical in numerous aspects of our lives:
Introduction: • Why to predict? Is it that important? Meteorological data is important and critical in numerous aspects of our lives: • It helps in people (decision makings) in aspects like: agriculture, transportation, social activities,...etc. • It is needed for the calculation of other critically needed information: air pollution, fire propagation, environmental quality data,...etc. • The short behavior of some natural disasters could be predicted and as a result: it saves our lives.
Meteorological Models 1 2 Domain Predicted Variables Domain Initial Conditions 4 3 NWP Model t=0 h t=12 h t=N h
Meteorological Models 1 2 Domain Predicted Variables Domain Initial Conditions 4 3 NWP Model t=0 h t=12 h t=N h
Meteorological Models 1 2 Domain Predicted Variables Domain Initial Conditions 4 3 NWP Model t=0 h t=12 h t=N h
Meteorological Models * Dt = 90 km 1 2 Level 3 Domain Predicted Variables Domain Initial Conditions 4 3 Level 2 NWP Model t=0 h t=12 h t=N h Level 1
Meteorological Models 1 2 Domain Predicted Variables Domain Initial Conditions 4 3 NWP Model t=0 h t=12 h t=N h
Meteorological Models 1 2 Domain Predicted Variables Domain Initial Conditions 4 3 NWP Model t=0 h t=12 h t=N h
Meteorological Models 1 2 Domain Predicted Variables Domain Initial Conditions 4 3 NWP Model t=0 h t=12 h t=N h
Meteorological Models Prediction Quality Problem Prediction Quality is subject of: • The Numerical Weather Prediction (NWP) model itself. (WRF, MM5,...etc) • Runtime injection of real observations to the NWP model. • Input Data (Initial Conditions). • Physical Parametrization (representation of sub-scale meteorological phenomena)
Meteorological Models Prediction Quality Problem Prediction Quality is subject of: • The Numerical Weather Prediction (NWP) model itself. (WRF, MM5,...etc) • Runtime injection of real observations to the NWP model. • Input Data (Initial Conditions). • Physical Parametrization (representation of sub-scale meteorological phenomena)
Meteorological Models Prediction Quality: Input Data (Initial Conditions)
Meteorological Models Prediction Quality: Input Data (Initial Conditions) Global Forecasting 36 KM Low resolution domain
Meteorological Models Prediction Quality: Input Data (Initial Conditions) Global Forecasting 4 KM 36 KM Low resolution domain
Meteorological Models Prediction Quality: Input Data (Initial Conditions) Global Forecasting 4 KM Nesting 36 KM Low resolution domain
Meteorological Models Prediction Quality: Input Data (Initial Conditions) Global Forecasting 4 KM Nesting 36 KM Low resolution domain
Meteorological Models Prediction Quality: Input Data (Initial Conditions) Global Forecasting Uncertainty of initial atmosphere state or Imperfectness of initial conditions 4 KM Nesting 36 KM Low resolution domain
Meteorological Models Prediction Quality: Physical Parametrization Sub-scale meteorological processes representation
Meteorological Models Prediction Quality: Physical Parametrization Sub-scale meteorological processes representation • Various meteorological phenomena occurs within scales of 4 KM less than (1 KM). (surface flux of energy, cumulus cloud, solar radiation, ..etc )
Meteorological Models Prediction Quality: Physical Parametrization Sub-scale meteorological processes representation • Various meteorological phenomena occurs within scales of 4 KM less than (1 KM). (surface flux of energy, cumulus cloud, solar radiation, ..etc ) • To represent this process in domain scale, NWP model is coupled with physical sub-models that includes these processes in domain grid points. • Physical sub-models provide NWP models with a set of variables by calculating high-resolution data that characterize each sub-scale phenomena or process.
Meteorological Models Prediction Quality: Physical Parametrization Sub-scale meteorological processes representation • Various meteorological phenomena occurs within scales of 4 KM less than (1 KM). (surface flux of energy, cumulus cloud, solar radiation, ..etc ) • To represent this process in domain scale, NWP model is coupled with physical sub-models that includes these processes in domain grid points. • Physical sub-models provide NWP models with a set of variables by calculating high-resolution data that characterize each sub-scale phenomena or process.
How a NWP model is coupled with physical sub-models? NWP model t=x t=x+1 WRF
How a NWP model is coupled with physical sub-models? NWP model ST, HF t=x t=x+1 ST, HF, SM, DSE Phys. sub.mdel WRF Albedo Soil Moisture Surface emissivity Surface Roughness Veg. Table variables Evaporation ratios Surface absorption . .
How a NWP model is coupled with physical sub-models? NWP model ST, HF t=x t=x+1 t=x+2 ST, HF, SM, DSE Phys. sub.mdel WRF Albedo Soil Moisture Surface emissivity Surface Roughness Veg. Table variables Evaporation ratios Surface absorption . .
How a NWP model is coupled with physical sub-models? NWP model ST, HF t=x t=x+1 t=x+2 ST, HF, SM, DSE Phys. sub.mdel WRF Albedo Soil Moisture Surface emissivity Surface Roughness The values of these parameters fall within ranges, a small change in Veg. Table variables Evaporation ratios their values produce non-negligible differences in prediction results Surface absorption . .
Prediction is not precise.... Hurricane Katrina Case: Prediction of 28.8.2005 at 12:00h. to 30.8.2005 at 24:00 (36 hours): 400.00 40 Acc . Precipitation mm 325.00 33 LHF W/m2 250.00 26 175.00 19 Observed Predicted Observed Predicted 100.00 12 12 21 30 39 48 12 21 30 39 48 H o u r H o u r
NWP Enhancement Ensemble Prediction System (EPS) • The Basic idea of an EPS method is to reflect the possible variations in initial conditions and physical parameters in the final result of the meteorological prediction. • A set of predictions is conducted, each of which considers a different combination of initial conditions or physical parameters. • The average of all predictions´ results is considered as the final result of prediction
Ensemble Prediction System
Ensemble Prediction System NWP Phys. sub.mdel Albedo Soil Moisture CZIL Surface Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT
Ensemble Prediction System NWP Phys. sub.mdel Albedo AlbedoSoil Albedo Soil Moisture AlbedoSoil Moisture Albedo Moisture CZIL Soil CZIL Surface Soil Moisture Surface CZIL Moisture Surface CZIL Roughness Roughness CZIL Roughness Veg. Table Surface Veg. Table Surface Veg. Table REFKDT Roughness REFKDT Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT Veg. Table REFKDT REFKDT
Ensemble Prediction System NWP Phys. sub.mdel Albedo AlbedoSoil Albedo Soil Moisture AlbedoSoil Moisture Albedo Moisture CZIL Soil CZIL Surface Soil Moisture Surface CZIL Moisture Surface CZIL Roughness Roughness CZIL Roughness Veg. Table Surface Veg. Table Surface Veg. Table REFKDT Roughness REFKDT Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT Veg. Table REFKDT REFKDT
Ensemble Prediction System NWP Ensemble Prediction costs (computationally) and Phys. sub.mdel normally not precise! Albedo Albedo Albedo Soil Soil Moisture What do we propose? AlbedoSoil Moisture Albedo Moisture CZIL Soil CZIL Surface Soil Moisture Surface CZIL Moisture Surface CZIL Roughness Roughness CZIL Roughness Veg. Table Surface Veg. Table Surface Veg. Table REFKDT Roughness REFKDT Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT Veg. Table REFKDT REFKDT
Genetic Ensemble Method Two-Phase Prediction Scheme
G-Ensemble
G-Ensemble Calibrating Ensemble members to minimize prediction error using GA. Calibration is done in a phase before prediction time. Init. Ensemble t=-6 h t=-3 h t=00 h t=3 h t=6 h t=n h Phys. Parm. Calibration Prediction Albedo Soil Moisture CZIL Surface Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT ...
G-Ensemble Calibrating Ensemble members to minimize prediction error using GA. Calibration is done in a phase before prediction time. Init. Ensemble t=-6 h t=-3 h t=00 h t=3 h t=6 h t=n h Phys. Parm. Calibration Prediction Albedo Soil Moisture CZIL Surface Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT ...
G-Ensemble Calibrating Ensemble members to minimize prediction error using GA. Calibration is done in a phase before prediction time. Init. Ensemble Observation t=-6 h t=-3 h t=00 h t=3 h t=6 h t=n h Phys. Parm. Calibration Prediction Albedo Soil Moisture CZIL Surface Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT ...
G-Ensemble Calibrating Ensemble members to minimize prediction error using GA. Calibration is done in a phase before prediction time. Init. Ensemble Observation t=-6 h t=-3 h t=00 h t=3 h t=6 h t=n h Phys. Parm. Calibration Prediction Albedo Soil Moisture CZIL Surface Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT ...
G-Ensemble Calibrating Ensemble members to minimize prediction error using GA. Calibration is done in a phase before prediction time. Init. Ensemble GA Parameter adjustment Observation t=-6 h t=-3 h t=00 h t=3 h t=6 h t=n h Phys. Parm. Calibration Prediction Albedo Soil Moisture CZIL Surface Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT ...
G-Ensemble Calibrating Ensemble members to minimize prediction error using GA. Calibration is done in a phase before prediction time. Init. Ensemble GA Parameter adjustment Observation t=-6 h t=-3 h t=00 h t=3 h t=6 h t=n h Phys. Parm. Calibration Prediction Albedo Soil Moisture CZIL Surface Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT ...
G-Ensemble Calibrating Ensemble members to minimize prediction error using GA. Calibration is done in a phase before prediction time. Init. Ensemble GA Parameter adjustment Observation t=-6 h t=-3 h t=00 h t=3 h t=6 h t=n h Phys. Parm. Calibration Prediction Albedo Soil Moisture CZIL Surface Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT ...
G-Ensemble Calibrating Ensemble members to minimize prediction error using GA. Calibration is done in a phase before prediction time. Init. Ensemble Calibrated Ensemble Set GA Parameter G-Ensemble set adjustment Observation t=-6 h t=-3 h t=00 h t=3 h t=6 h t=n h Phys. Parm. Calibration Prediction Albedo Soil Moisture CZIL Surface Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT ...
G-Ensemble Calibrating Ensemble members to minimize prediction error using GA. Calibration is done in a phase before prediction time. Init. Ensemble Calibrated Ensemble Set GA Parameter G-Ensemble set adjustment Observation Calibrated Ens. Member Best Genetic Ens. Member (BeGEM) t=-6 h t=-3 h t=00 h t=3 h t=6 h t=n h Phys. Parm. Calibration Prediction Albedo Soil Moisture CZIL Surface Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT ...
G-Ensemble Calibrating Ensemble members to minimize prediction error using GA. Calibration is done in a phase before prediction time. Init. Ensemble Calibrated Ensemble Set GA Parameter G-Ensemble set adjustment Observation Calibrated Ens. Member Best Genetic Ens. Member (BeGEM) t=-6 h t=-3 h t=00 h t=3 h t=6 h t=n h Phys. Parm. Calibration Prediction Albedo Soil Moisture CZIL Surface Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT ...
G-Ensemble Calibration Error Depending on the error function used, two G-Ensemble strategies are presented: 1) Single-Variable G-Ensemble Fitness = Fitness for wind component = 7.3 m/s Fitness for temperature = 4.2 c or k
G-Ensemble Calibration Error Depending on the error function used, two G-Ensemble strategies are presented: 1) Single-Variable G-Ensemble Fitness = Fitness for wind component = 7.3 m/s Fitness for temperature = 4.2 c or k 2) Multi-Variable G-Ensemble We use a Normalized RMSD in order to be able to enhance predictions of a set of meteorological variables together. The normalized root mean squared deviation or error (NRMSD or NRMSE) is the RMSD divided by the range of observed values:
G-Ensemble Calibration Error Depending on the error function used, two G-Ensemble strategies are presented: 1) Single-Variable G-Ensemble Fitness = Fitness for wind component = 7.3 m/s Fitness for temperature = 4.2 c or k 2) Multi-Variable G-Ensemble We use a Normalized RMSD in order to be able to enhance predictions of a set of meteorological variables together. The normalized root mean squared deviation or error (NRMSD or NRMSE) is the RMSD divided by the range of observed values: Fitness for wind component = 9.1% Fitness for temperature = 3.7%
G-Ensemble Calibration Error Depending on the error function used, two G-Ensemble strategies are presented: 1) Single-Variable G-Ensemble Fitness = Fitness for wind component = 7.3 m/s Fitness for temperature = 4.2 c or k 2) Multi-Variable G-Ensemble We use a Normalized RMSD in order to be able to enhance predictions of a set of meteorological variables together. The normalized root mean squared deviation or error (NRMSD or NRMSE) is the RMSD divided by the range of observed values: Fitness for wind component = 9.1% Fitness for temperature = 3.7% Fitness (of all) = NRMSD(wind)+ NRMSD(T)+ NRMSD(RAINC) = value%
Experimentation: Benchmark Test Case: On August 28, 2005, Hurricane Katrina was in the Gulf of Mexico where it powered up to a Category 5 Gulf of Mexico
Experimentation
Experimentation Temperature 2m: T2 Sea Surface Temperature: TSK Latent Heat Flux: LHF Wind component: velocity in east-west direction V10 Wind component: velocity in north-south Accumulated Precipitation:RAINC direction U10
Experimentation Temperature 2m: T2 Sea Surface Temperature: TSK Latent Heat Flux: LHF Wind component: velocity in east-west direction V10 Wind component: velocity in north-south Accumulated Precipitation:RAINC direction U10 1. Prediction is held 28.8.2005 at 12:00h. to 30.8.2005 at 24:00 (36 hours) 2. Initializing Ensemble combinations of different input data variables randomly. 3. Applying GA to calibrate input variables of LSM sub-model to generate Genetic Ensembles
Experimentation 30m. Single-Variable G-Ensemble (Ensemble vs G-Ensemble): LHF Ens. size:30 Crossover:0.7 Mutation: 0.2 Iteration: 20 Fitness: RMSD
Experimentation Ens. size:30 30m. Single-Variable G-Ensemble (Ensemble vs G-Ensemble): RAINC Crossover:0.7 Mutation: 0.2 Iteration: 20 Fitness: RMSD
Experimentation 40m. Multi-Variable G-Ensemble (Ensemble vs G-Ensemble): Ens. size:40 Crossover:0.7 Mutation: 0.2 Iteration: 20 Fitness: NRMSD
Experimentation 40m. G-Ensemble (Multi-Variable G-Ensemble Error vs Single Variable Error):
Experimentation 40m. G-Ensemble (Multi-Variable G-Ensemble Error vs Single Variable Error):
Experimentation 40m. G-Ensemble (Multi-Variable G-Ensemble Error vs Single Variable Error):
Experimentation 40m. G-Ensemble (Multi-Variable G-Ensemble Error vs Single Variable Error):
Experimentation Cost Vs. Error Reduction Ensemble(size, iteration) Ex. Time Ensemble (40, 0) 1120 m. Best-G.Ensemble (40,5) 369 m. Best-G.Ensemble (40,10) 709 m. Best-G.Ensemble (40,15) 1024 m. Best-G.Ensemble(40,20) 1549 m. Best G.Ensemble(20, 20) 709 m.
Experimentation Cost Vs. Error Reduction Ensemble(size, iteration) Ex. Time Ensemble (40, 0) 1120 m. Best-G.Ensemble (40,5) 369 m. Best-G.Ensemble (40,10) 709 m. Best-G.Ensemble (40,15) 1024 m. Best-G.Ensemble(40,20) 1549 m. Best G.Ensemble(20, 20) 709 m.
Experimentation Cost Vs. Error Reduction Ensemble(size, iteration) Ex. Time Ensemble (40, 0) 1120 m. Best-G.Ensemble (40,5) 369 m. Best-G.Ensemble (40,10) 709 m. Best-G.Ensemble (40,15) 1024 m. Best-G.Ensemble(40,20) 1549 m. Best G.Ensemble(20, 20) 709 m.
Conclusions and Future Work • We proposed a methodology to enhance methodological prediction process, using Genetic Algorithm functions and techniques. • Our method depends on the adjustment of input data set that causes less possible error compared with observations. • We did also experiments on more cases and predictions are enhanced using our method. and we will make more experiments to cover real prediction cases. • In scenarios with a limited number of computing resources, in which EPS could not be used due to its time constraints, G-Ensemble stands to be a good alternative choice. • Thanks to the enhancement in prediction accuracy, more sophisticated schemes might be developed in the near future by injecting observed meteorological variables at run-time.
Genetic Ensemble (G-Ensemble) for Meteorological Prediction Enhancement Hisham Ihshaish, Ana Cortés, and Miquel A. Senar hisham@caos.uab.es, {ana.cortes,miquelangel.senar}@uab.es Thanks! Questions?
Meteorological Models
Meteorological Models • The aim of a meteorological model is to predict the atmospheric state in the future:
Meteorological Models Now 00:00 Mid Day Midnight Tom.Mid Day t=0 h t=12 h t=24 h t=36 h Initial state Predicted state Predicted state Predicted state 1. surface properties: elevation, land use, vegetation index, temperature of sea surface temperature, ... 2. meteorological variables: temperature, humidity, pressure and wind

More Related Content

PPTX
Dissertation Slides
bySanghui Ahn
 
PDF
New policies
byNicolas Navet
 
PDF
Time-Frequency Representation of Microseismic Signals using the SST
byUT Technology
 
PPTX
Speech signal time frequency representation
byNikolay Karpov
 
PPTX
A review of time­‐frequency methods
byUT Technology
 
PDF
Fractal Kinetics Bruyères-le-Châtel
byDavid L. Griscom
 
PDF
SOCG: Linear-Size Approximations to the Vietoris-Rips Filtration
byDon Sheehy
 
PDF
Short-time homomorphic wavelet estimation
byUT Technology
 
Dissertation Slides
bySanghui Ahn
 
New policies
byNicolas Navet
 
Time-Frequency Representation of Microseismic Signals using the SST
byUT Technology
 
Speech signal time frequency representation
byNikolay Karpov
 
A review of time­‐frequency methods
byUT Technology
 
Fractal Kinetics Bruyères-le-Châtel
byDavid L. Griscom
 
SOCG: Linear-Size Approximations to the Vietoris-Rips Filtration
byDon Sheehy
 
Short-time homomorphic wavelet estimation
byUT Technology
 

What's hot

PDF
Slide Handouts with Notes
byLeon Nguyen
 
PPT
TH1.L10.3: MONOSTATIC CALIBRATION OF BOTH TANDEM-X SATELLITES
bygrssieee
 
PDF
Decomposition and Denoising for moment sequences using convex optimization
byBadri Narayan Bhaskar
 
PPT
Seismic Data Processing, Ahmed Osama
byAhmed Osama
 
PDF
Wqtc2011 causes offalsealarms-20111115-final
byJohn B. Cook, PE, CEO
 
PDF
Parton Distributions at a 100 TeV Hadron Collider
byjuanrojochacon
 
PDF
goGPS (March 2010)
byEugenio Realini
 
PDF
Numerical Renormalization Group computation of magnetic relaxation rates
byKrissia Zawadzki
 
PDF
New dynamics in parton distributions at a 100 TeV hadron collider
byjuanrojochacon
 
PDF
Similarities in the self organised critical characteristics between radon and...
byAnax Fotopoulos
 
PDF
Surveys
byCosmoAIMS Bassett
 
PPT
"Squeezed States in Bose-Einstein Condensate"
byChad Orzel
 
PDF
Transom Stern High Speed Vessel - Thesis Presentation
byELANGOVAN Muniyandy
 
PPTX
Fullprof Refinement
bySaurav Ch. Sarma
 
PDF
Snow Analysis for Numerical Weather prediction at ECMWF
bygrssieee
 
PDF
3_derosnay_IGARSS_2011.pdf
bygrssieee
 
PDF
Foss4g2009tokyo Realini Go Gps
byOSgeo Japan
 
PDF
Fundamentals of Passive and Active Sonar Technical Training Short Course Sampler
byJim Jenkins
 
PDF
Intro to seismic 2
byzhwchen
 
PDF
Numerical Analysis of Transom stern high speed ship
byELANGOVAN Muniyandy
 
Slide Handouts with Notes
byLeon Nguyen
 
TH1.L10.3: MONOSTATIC CALIBRATION OF BOTH TANDEM-X SATELLITES
bygrssieee
 
Decomposition and Denoising for moment sequences using convex optimization
byBadri Narayan Bhaskar
 
Seismic Data Processing, Ahmed Osama
byAhmed Osama
 
Wqtc2011 causes offalsealarms-20111115-final
byJohn B. Cook, PE, CEO
 
Parton Distributions at a 100 TeV Hadron Collider
byjuanrojochacon
 
goGPS (March 2010)
byEugenio Realini
 
Numerical Renormalization Group computation of magnetic relaxation rates
byKrissia Zawadzki
 
New dynamics in parton distributions at a 100 TeV hadron collider
byjuanrojochacon
 
Similarities in the self organised critical characteristics between radon and...
byAnax Fotopoulos
 
Surveys
byCosmoAIMS Bassett
 
"Squeezed States in Bose-Einstein Condensate"
byChad Orzel
 
Transom Stern High Speed Vessel - Thesis Presentation
byELANGOVAN Muniyandy
 
Fullprof Refinement
bySaurav Ch. Sarma
 
Snow Analysis for Numerical Weather prediction at ECMWF
bygrssieee
 
3_derosnay_IGARSS_2011.pdf
bygrssieee
 
Foss4g2009tokyo Realini Go Gps
byOSgeo Japan
 
Fundamentals of Passive and Active Sonar Technical Training Short Course Sampler
byJim Jenkins
 
Intro to seismic 2
byzhwchen
 
Numerical Analysis of Transom stern high speed ship
byELANGOVAN Muniyandy
 

Viewers also liked

PPT
Pca and kpca of ecg signal
byes712
 
PPT
Download It
bybutest
 
PPT
IGARSS2011-I-Ling.ppt
bygrssieee
 
PPT
A Multiple Classifiers System For Solving The Character Recognition Problem I...
byRanda Elanwar
 
PDF
Confusion Matrices for Improving Performance of Feature Pattern Classifier Sy...
byDaniele Loiacono
 
PDF
PCA and Classification
byFatwa Ramdani
 
PPTX
A rank based ensemble classifier for image classification
byWin Yu
 
PPT
2.8 accuracy and ensemble methods
byKrish_ver2
 
PPT
Chapter - 6 Data Mining Concepts and Techniques 2nd Ed slides Han & Kamber
byerror007
 
Pca and kpca of ecg signal
byes712
 
Download It
bybutest
 
IGARSS2011-I-Ling.ppt
bygrssieee
 
A Multiple Classifiers System For Solving The Character Recognition Problem I...
byRanda Elanwar
 
Confusion Matrices for Improving Performance of Feature Pattern Classifier Sy...
byDaniele Loiacono
 
PCA and Classification
byFatwa Ramdani
 
A rank based ensemble classifier for image classification
byWin Yu
 
2.8 accuracy and ensemble methods
byKrish_ver2
 
Chapter - 6 Data Mining Concepts and Techniques 2nd Ed slides Han & Kamber
byerror007
 

Similar to Pdpta11 G-Ensemble for Meteorological Prediction Enhancement

PPTX
Numerical_Weather_Prediction_Overview.pptx
bydrmohanthota
 
PDF
Simulating Weather: Numerical Weather Prediction as Computational Simulation
byTing-Shuo Yo
 
PPTX
Numerical Weather Prediction
bySourav Kumar Mund
 
PDF
Climate_Modelling_Saurabh.pdf
byAtikNawaz2
 
PPTX
Climate Models and Their Evaluation.pptx
bychiefzoche
 
PPTX
HIERARCHY of climate models used in global atmospheric system.pptx
byvincentAjayi2
 
PPTX
Event 31
byetheruoh
 
PPTX
Effects of Uncertainty in Cloud Microphysics on Passive Microwave Rainfall Me...
bygrssieee
 
PPTX
Presentation Kazapua
byIsiah Tefo Kazapua
 
PPT
Monsoon Rainfall Forecast+.ppt
byAryanNetkar1
 
PDF
2202.11214.pdf
byUmangbhalla2
 
PPTX
Gab Abramowitz_The e-MAST data-model interface
byTERN Australia
 
PDF
Numerical Weather and Climate Prediction Thomas Tomkins Warner
bynewbyguinoo18
 
PDF
Future guidelines the meteorological view - Isabel Martínez (AEMet)
byIrSOLaV Pomares
 
PDF
Program on Mathematical and Statistical Methods for Climate and the Earth Sys...
byThe Statistical and Applied Mathematical Sciences Institute
 
PPT
13-Fcst-NWP.ppt
byssuser9838f7
 
PPTX
MPI 794 (week-1 & 2)
byYasser B. A. Farag
 
PDF
Numerical Weather and Climate Prediction Thomas Tomkins Warner
bymibgcwxd066
 
PPT
WRF model Cloud Microphysics paramterization
byvysbabu
 
PPTX
Weather forcasting.pptx
byssuser9838f7
 
Numerical_Weather_Prediction_Overview.pptx
bydrmohanthota
 
Simulating Weather: Numerical Weather Prediction as Computational Simulation
byTing-Shuo Yo
 
Numerical Weather Prediction
bySourav Kumar Mund
 
Climate_Modelling_Saurabh.pdf
byAtikNawaz2
 
Climate Models and Their Evaluation.pptx
bychiefzoche
 
HIERARCHY of climate models used in global atmospheric system.pptx
byvincentAjayi2
 
Event 31
byetheruoh
 
Effects of Uncertainty in Cloud Microphysics on Passive Microwave Rainfall Me...
bygrssieee
 
Presentation Kazapua
byIsiah Tefo Kazapua
 
Monsoon Rainfall Forecast+.ppt
byAryanNetkar1
 
2202.11214.pdf
byUmangbhalla2
 
Gab Abramowitz_The e-MAST data-model interface
byTERN Australia
 
Numerical Weather and Climate Prediction Thomas Tomkins Warner
bynewbyguinoo18
 
Future guidelines the meteorological view - Isabel Martínez (AEMet)
byIrSOLaV Pomares
 
Program on Mathematical and Statistical Methods for Climate and the Earth Sys...
byThe Statistical and Applied Mathematical Sciences Institute
 
13-Fcst-NWP.ppt
byssuser9838f7
 
MPI 794 (week-1 & 2)
byYasser B. A. Farag
 
Numerical Weather and Climate Prediction Thomas Tomkins Warner
bymibgcwxd066
 
WRF model Cloud Microphysics paramterization
byvysbabu
 
Weather forcasting.pptx
byssuser9838f7
 

Recently uploaded

PDF
TrustArc Webinar - From Trends to Action: Fitting AI Governance into Privacy Ops
byTrustArc
 
PDF
GDG Cloud Southlake #49: Pradeep R Kumar: Implications of Agentic AI for Iden...
byJames Anderson
 
PDF
Chapter 5 Security Mechanisms iin computer security.pdf
byGetnet Tigabie Askale -(GM)
 
PDF
final.pdf
byomarbishtawi04
 
PDF
HOW TO OVERCOME THE THREATS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AGAINST HUMANITY.pdf
byFaga1939
 
PDF
Effortless Distributed Systems with Aspire.pdf
byParticular Software
 
PDF
From Artificial Intelligence to African Intelligence: Transforming Research &...
byMoses Kemibaro
 
PDF
UiPath Automation Developer Associate Training Series 2026 - Session 3
byDianaGray10
 
PDF
UiPath Modern Automation Playbook -Session 2
bysuhanisingh58689
 
PDF
Automated Governance for FME Flow: Smarter Admin at Scale
bySafe Software
 
PDF
20260212 Security-JAWS activity results for 2025 and activity goals for 2026
byTyphon 666
 
PDF
GenerationAI_Paris_2025_Architecting_Intelligence.pdf
byapidays
 
PPTX
PPTX game guess the logo with a twistppt
byAdrianAnig
 
PDF
February 2026 Patch Tuesday hosted by Chris Goettl and Todd Schell
byIvanti
 
PPTX
Automation Without Apprentices: How AI Challenges the Open Source Way
byIcinga
 
PDF
apidays New York 2025 | AI in Application Security
byapidays
 
PDF
Explaining specific examples of purpose-specific BOM
byakipii ogaoga
 
PPTX
Celonis Optimizing your future with process
bydevjeremyappleyard
 
PDF
Oracle Cloud Infrastructure 2025 Architect Professional (1Z0-1127-25) Master ...
byExamCert App
 
PPTX
Workflow and decision Automation with Flowable
bychakib ch
 
TrustArc Webinar - From Trends to Action: Fitting AI Governance into Privacy Ops
byTrustArc
 
GDG Cloud Southlake #49: Pradeep R Kumar: Implications of Agentic AI for Iden...
byJames Anderson
 
Chapter 5 Security Mechanisms iin computer security.pdf
byGetnet Tigabie Askale -(GM)
 
final.pdf
byomarbishtawi04
 
HOW TO OVERCOME THE THREATS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AGAINST HUMANITY.pdf
byFaga1939
 
Effortless Distributed Systems with Aspire.pdf
byParticular Software
 
From Artificial Intelligence to African Intelligence: Transforming Research &...
byMoses Kemibaro
 
UiPath Automation Developer Associate Training Series 2026 - Session 3
byDianaGray10
 
UiPath Modern Automation Playbook -Session 2
bysuhanisingh58689
 
Automated Governance for FME Flow: Smarter Admin at Scale
bySafe Software
 
20260212 Security-JAWS activity results for 2025 and activity goals for 2026
byTyphon 666
 
GenerationAI_Paris_2025_Architecting_Intelligence.pdf
byapidays
 
PPTX game guess the logo with a twistppt
byAdrianAnig
 
February 2026 Patch Tuesday hosted by Chris Goettl and Todd Schell
byIvanti
 
Automation Without Apprentices: How AI Challenges the Open Source Way
byIcinga
 
apidays New York 2025 | AI in Application Security
byapidays
 
Explaining specific examples of purpose-specific BOM
byakipii ogaoga
 
Celonis Optimizing your future with process
bydevjeremyappleyard
 
Oracle Cloud Infrastructure 2025 Architect Professional (1Z0-1127-25) Master ...
byExamCert App
 
Workflow and decision Automation with Flowable
bychakib ch
 

Pdpta11 G-Ensemble for Meteorological Prediction Enhancement

  • 1.
    Genetic Ensemble (G-Ensemble)for Meteorological Prediction Enhancement Hisham Ihshaish, Ana Cortés, and Miquel A. Senar hisham@caos.uab.es, {ana.cortes,miquelangel.senar}@uab.es Computer Architecture & Operating Systems Department Barcelona, Spain The 2011 International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Processing Techniques and Applications (PDPTA´11) 18-21, July, 2011 Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
  • 2.
    Presentation: • Introduction. • Meteorological Models. • Problem and Methodology. • Experimentation. • Conclusions and Future Work.
  • 3.
  • 4.
    Introduction: • Why to predict? Is it that important?
  • 5.
    Introduction: • Why to predict? Is it that important? Meteorological data is important and critical in numerous aspects of our lives:
  • 6.
    Introduction: • Why to predict? Is it that important? Meteorological data is important and critical in numerous aspects of our lives: • It helps in people (decision makings) in aspects like: agriculture, transportation, social activities,...etc. • It is needed for the calculation of other critically needed information: air pollution, fire propagation, environmental quality data,...etc. • The short behavior of some natural disasters could be predicted and as a result: it saves our lives.
  • 7.
    Meteorological Models 1 2 Domain Predicted Variables Domain Initial Conditions 4 3 NWP Model t=0 h t=12 h t=N h
  • 8.
    Meteorological Models 1 2 Domain Predicted Variables Domain Initial Conditions 4 3 NWP Model t=0 h t=12 h t=N h
  • 9.
    Meteorological Models 1 2 Domain Predicted Variables Domain Initial Conditions 4 3 NWP Model t=0 h t=12 h t=N h
  • 10.
    Meteorological Models * Dt = 90 km 1 2 Level 3 Domain Predicted Variables Domain Initial Conditions 4 3 Level 2 NWP Model t=0 h t=12 h t=N h Level 1
  • 11.
    Meteorological Models 1 2 Domain Predicted Variables Domain Initial Conditions 4 3 NWP Model t=0 h t=12 h t=N h
  • 12.
    Meteorological Models 1 2 Domain Predicted Variables Domain Initial Conditions 4 3 NWP Model t=0 h t=12 h t=N h
  • 13.
    Meteorological Models 1 2 Domain Predicted Variables Domain Initial Conditions 4 3 NWP Model t=0 h t=12 h t=N h
  • 14.
    Meteorological Models Prediction QualityProblem Prediction Quality is subject of: • The Numerical Weather Prediction (NWP) model itself. (WRF, MM5,...etc) • Runtime injection of real observations to the NWP model. • Input Data (Initial Conditions). • Physical Parametrization (representation of sub-scale meteorological phenomena)
  • 15.
    Meteorological Models Prediction QualityProblem Prediction Quality is subject of: • The Numerical Weather Prediction (NWP) model itself. (WRF, MM5,...etc) • Runtime injection of real observations to the NWP model. • Input Data (Initial Conditions). • Physical Parametrization (representation of sub-scale meteorological phenomena)
  • 16.
    Meteorological Models Prediction Quality:Input Data (Initial Conditions)
  • 17.
    Meteorological Models Prediction Quality:Input Data (Initial Conditions) Global Forecasting 36 KM Low resolution domain
  • 18.
    Meteorological Models Prediction Quality:Input Data (Initial Conditions) Global Forecasting 4 KM 36 KM Low resolution domain
  • 19.
    Meteorological Models Prediction Quality:Input Data (Initial Conditions) Global Forecasting 4 KM Nesting 36 KM Low resolution domain
  • 20.
    Meteorological Models Prediction Quality:Input Data (Initial Conditions) Global Forecasting 4 KM Nesting 36 KM Low resolution domain
  • 21.
    Meteorological Models Prediction Quality:Input Data (Initial Conditions) Global Forecasting Uncertainty of initial atmosphere state or Imperfectness of initial conditions 4 KM Nesting 36 KM Low resolution domain
  • 22.
    Meteorological Models Prediction Quality:Physical Parametrization Sub-scale meteorological processes representation
  • 23.
    Meteorological Models Prediction Quality: Physical Parametrization Sub-scale meteorological processes representation • Various meteorological phenomena occurs within scales of 4 KM less than (1 KM). (surface flux of energy, cumulus cloud, solar radiation, ..etc )
  • 24.
    Meteorological Models Prediction Quality: Physical Parametrization Sub-scale meteorological processes representation • Various meteorological phenomena occurs within scales of 4 KM less than (1 KM). (surface flux of energy, cumulus cloud, solar radiation, ..etc ) • To represent this process in domain scale, NWP model is coupled with physical sub-models that includes these processes in domain grid points. • Physical sub-models provide NWP models with a set of variables by calculating high-resolution data that characterize each sub-scale phenomena or process.
  • 25.
    Meteorological Models Prediction Quality: Physical Parametrization Sub-scale meteorological processes representation • Various meteorological phenomena occurs within scales of 4 KM less than (1 KM). (surface flux of energy, cumulus cloud, solar radiation, ..etc ) • To represent this process in domain scale, NWP model is coupled with physical sub-models that includes these processes in domain grid points. • Physical sub-models provide NWP models with a set of variables by calculating high-resolution data that characterize each sub-scale phenomena or process.
  • 27.
    How a NWPmodel is coupled with physical sub-models? NWP model t=x t=x+1 WRF
  • 28.
    How a NWPmodel is coupled with physical sub-models? NWP model ST, HF t=x t=x+1 ST, HF, SM, DSE Phys. sub.mdel WRF Albedo Soil Moisture Surface emissivity Surface Roughness Veg. Table variables Evaporation ratios Surface absorption . .
  • 29.
    How a NWPmodel is coupled with physical sub-models? NWP model ST, HF t=x t=x+1 t=x+2 ST, HF, SM, DSE Phys. sub.mdel WRF Albedo Soil Moisture Surface emissivity Surface Roughness Veg. Table variables Evaporation ratios Surface absorption . .
  • 30.
    How a NWPmodel is coupled with physical sub-models? NWP model ST, HF t=x t=x+1 t=x+2 ST, HF, SM, DSE Phys. sub.mdel WRF Albedo Soil Moisture Surface emissivity Surface Roughness The values of these parameters fall within ranges, a small change in Veg. Table variables Evaporation ratios their values produce non-negligible differences in prediction results Surface absorption . .
  • 31.
    Prediction is notprecise.... Hurricane Katrina Case: Prediction of 28.8.2005 at 12:00h. to 30.8.2005 at 24:00 (36 hours): 400.00 40 Acc . Precipitation mm 325.00 33 LHF W/m2 250.00 26 175.00 19 Observed Predicted Observed Predicted 100.00 12 12 21 30 39 48 12 21 30 39 48 H o u r H o u r
  • 32.
    NWP Enhancement Ensemble PredictionSystem (EPS) • The Basic idea of an EPS method is to reflect the possible variations in initial conditions and physical parameters in the final result of the meteorological prediction. • A set of predictions is conducted, each of which considers a different combination of initial conditions or physical parameters. • The average of all predictions´ results is considered as the final result of prediction
  • 33.
  • 34.
    Ensemble Prediction System NWP Phys. sub.mdel Albedo Soil Moisture CZIL Surface Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT
  • 35.
    Ensemble Prediction System NWP Phys. sub.mdel Albedo AlbedoSoil Albedo Soil Moisture AlbedoSoil Moisture Albedo Moisture CZIL Soil CZIL Surface Soil Moisture Surface CZIL Moisture Surface CZIL Roughness Roughness CZIL Roughness Veg. Table Surface Veg. Table Surface Veg. Table REFKDT Roughness REFKDT Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT Veg. Table REFKDT REFKDT
  • 36.
    Ensemble Prediction System NWP Phys. sub.mdel Albedo AlbedoSoil Albedo Soil Moisture AlbedoSoil Moisture Albedo Moisture CZIL Soil CZIL Surface Soil Moisture Surface CZIL Moisture Surface CZIL Roughness Roughness CZIL Roughness Veg. Table Surface Veg. Table Surface Veg. Table REFKDT Roughness REFKDT Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT Veg. Table REFKDT REFKDT
  • 37.
    Ensemble Prediction System NWP Ensemble Prediction costs (computationally) and Phys. sub.mdel normally not precise! Albedo Albedo Albedo Soil Soil Moisture What do we propose? AlbedoSoil Moisture Albedo Moisture CZIL Soil CZIL Surface Soil Moisture Surface CZIL Moisture Surface CZIL Roughness Roughness CZIL Roughness Veg. Table Surface Veg. Table Surface Veg. Table REFKDT Roughness REFKDT Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT Veg. Table REFKDT REFKDT
  • 38.
  • 39.
  • 40.
    G-Ensemble Calibrating Ensemble members to minimize prediction error using GA. Calibration is done in a phase before prediction time. Init. Ensemble t=-6 h t=-3 h t=00 h t=3 h t=6 h t=n h Phys. Parm. Calibration Prediction Albedo Soil Moisture CZIL Surface Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT ...
  • 41.
    G-Ensemble Calibrating Ensemble members to minimize prediction error using GA. Calibration is done in a phase before prediction time. Init. Ensemble t=-6 h t=-3 h t=00 h t=3 h t=6 h t=n h Phys. Parm. Calibration Prediction Albedo Soil Moisture CZIL Surface Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT ...
  • 42.
    G-Ensemble Calibrating Ensemble members to minimize prediction error using GA. Calibration is done in a phase before prediction time. Init. Ensemble Observation t=-6 h t=-3 h t=00 h t=3 h t=6 h t=n h Phys. Parm. Calibration Prediction Albedo Soil Moisture CZIL Surface Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT ...
  • 43.
    G-Ensemble Calibrating Ensemble members to minimize prediction error using GA. Calibration is done in a phase before prediction time. Init. Ensemble Observation t=-6 h t=-3 h t=00 h t=3 h t=6 h t=n h Phys. Parm. Calibration Prediction Albedo Soil Moisture CZIL Surface Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT ...
  • 44.
    G-Ensemble Calibrating Ensemble members to minimize prediction error using GA. Calibration is done in a phase before prediction time. Init. Ensemble GA Parameter adjustment Observation t=-6 h t=-3 h t=00 h t=3 h t=6 h t=n h Phys. Parm. Calibration Prediction Albedo Soil Moisture CZIL Surface Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT ...
  • 45.
    G-Ensemble Calibrating Ensemble members to minimize prediction error using GA. Calibration is done in a phase before prediction time. Init. Ensemble GA Parameter adjustment Observation t=-6 h t=-3 h t=00 h t=3 h t=6 h t=n h Phys. Parm. Calibration Prediction Albedo Soil Moisture CZIL Surface Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT ...
  • 46.
    G-Ensemble Calibrating Ensemble members to minimize prediction error using GA. Calibration is done in a phase before prediction time. Init. Ensemble GA Parameter adjustment Observation t=-6 h t=-3 h t=00 h t=3 h t=6 h t=n h Phys. Parm. Calibration Prediction Albedo Soil Moisture CZIL Surface Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT ...
  • 47.
    G-Ensemble Calibrating Ensemble members to minimize prediction error using GA. Calibration is done in a phase before prediction time. Init. Ensemble Calibrated Ensemble Set GA Parameter G-Ensemble set adjustment Observation t=-6 h t=-3 h t=00 h t=3 h t=6 h t=n h Phys. Parm. Calibration Prediction Albedo Soil Moisture CZIL Surface Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT ...
  • 48.
    G-Ensemble Calibrating Ensemble members to minimize prediction error using GA. Calibration is done in a phase before prediction time. Init. Ensemble Calibrated Ensemble Set GA Parameter G-Ensemble set adjustment Observation Calibrated Ens. Member Best Genetic Ens. Member (BeGEM) t=-6 h t=-3 h t=00 h t=3 h t=6 h t=n h Phys. Parm. Calibration Prediction Albedo Soil Moisture CZIL Surface Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT ...
  • 49.
    G-Ensemble Calibrating Ensemble members to minimize prediction error using GA. Calibration is done in a phase before prediction time. Init. Ensemble Calibrated Ensemble Set GA Parameter G-Ensemble set adjustment Observation Calibrated Ens. Member Best Genetic Ens. Member (BeGEM) t=-6 h t=-3 h t=00 h t=3 h t=6 h t=n h Phys. Parm. Calibration Prediction Albedo Soil Moisture CZIL Surface Roughness Veg. Table REFKDT ...
  • 50.
    G-Ensemble Calibration Error Dependingon the error function used, two G-Ensemble strategies are presented: 1) Single-Variable G-Ensemble Fitness = Fitness for wind component = 7.3 m/s Fitness for temperature = 4.2 c or k
  • 51.
    G-Ensemble Calibration Error Dependingon the error function used, two G-Ensemble strategies are presented: 1) Single-Variable G-Ensemble Fitness = Fitness for wind component = 7.3 m/s Fitness for temperature = 4.2 c or k 2) Multi-Variable G-Ensemble We use a Normalized RMSD in order to be able to enhance predictions of a set of meteorological variables together. The normalized root mean squared deviation or error (NRMSD or NRMSE) is the RMSD divided by the range of observed values:
  • 52.
    G-Ensemble Calibration Error Dependingon the error function used, two G-Ensemble strategies are presented: 1) Single-Variable G-Ensemble Fitness = Fitness for wind component = 7.3 m/s Fitness for temperature = 4.2 c or k 2) Multi-Variable G-Ensemble We use a Normalized RMSD in order to be able to enhance predictions of a set of meteorological variables together. The normalized root mean squared deviation or error (NRMSD or NRMSE) is the RMSD divided by the range of observed values: Fitness for wind component = 9.1% Fitness for temperature = 3.7%
  • 53.
    G-Ensemble Calibration Error Dependingon the error function used, two G-Ensemble strategies are presented: 1) Single-Variable G-Ensemble Fitness = Fitness for wind component = 7.3 m/s Fitness for temperature = 4.2 c or k 2) Multi-Variable G-Ensemble We use a Normalized RMSD in order to be able to enhance predictions of a set of meteorological variables together. The normalized root mean squared deviation or error (NRMSD or NRMSE) is the RMSD divided by the range of observed values: Fitness for wind component = 9.1% Fitness for temperature = 3.7% Fitness (of all) = NRMSD(wind)+ NRMSD(T)+ NRMSD(RAINC) = value%
  • 54.
    Experimentation: Benchmark Test Case: OnAugust 28, 2005, Hurricane Katrina was in the Gulf of Mexico where it powered up to a Category 5 Gulf of Mexico
  • 55.
  • 56.
    Experimentation Temperature 2m: T2 Sea Surface Temperature: TSK Latent Heat Flux: LHF Wind component: velocity in east-west direction V10 Wind component: velocity in north-south Accumulated Precipitation:RAINC direction U10
  • 57.
    Experimentation Temperature 2m: T2 Sea Surface Temperature: TSK Latent Heat Flux: LHF Wind component: velocity in east-west direction V10 Wind component: velocity in north-south Accumulated Precipitation:RAINC direction U10 1. Prediction is held 28.8.2005 at 12:00h. to 30.8.2005 at 24:00 (36 hours) 2. Initializing Ensemble combinations of different input data variables randomly. 3. Applying GA to calibrate input variables of LSM sub-model to generate Genetic Ensembles
  • 58.
    Experimentation 30m. Single-Variable G-Ensemble(Ensemble vs G-Ensemble): LHF Ens. size:30 Crossover:0.7 Mutation: 0.2 Iteration: 20 Fitness: RMSD
  • 59.
    Experimentation Ens. size:30 30m. Single-Variable G-Ensemble (Ensemble vs G-Ensemble): RAINC Crossover:0.7 Mutation: 0.2 Iteration: 20 Fitness: RMSD
  • 60.
    Experimentation 40m. Multi-VariableG-Ensemble (Ensemble vs G-Ensemble): Ens. size:40 Crossover:0.7 Mutation: 0.2 Iteration: 20 Fitness: NRMSD
  • 61.
    Experimentation 40m. G-Ensemble(Multi-Variable G-Ensemble Error vs Single Variable Error):
  • 62.
    Experimentation 40m. G-Ensemble(Multi-Variable G-Ensemble Error vs Single Variable Error):
  • 63.
    Experimentation 40m. G-Ensemble(Multi-Variable G-Ensemble Error vs Single Variable Error):
  • 64.
    Experimentation 40m. G-Ensemble(Multi-Variable G-Ensemble Error vs Single Variable Error):
  • 65.
    Experimentation CostVs. Error Reduction Ensemble(size, iteration) Ex. Time Ensemble (40, 0) 1120 m. Best-G.Ensemble (40,5) 369 m. Best-G.Ensemble (40,10) 709 m. Best-G.Ensemble (40,15) 1024 m. Best-G.Ensemble(40,20) 1549 m. Best G.Ensemble(20, 20) 709 m.
  • 66.
    Experimentation Cost Vs.Error Reduction Ensemble(size, iteration) Ex. Time Ensemble (40, 0) 1120 m. Best-G.Ensemble (40,5) 369 m. Best-G.Ensemble (40,10) 709 m. Best-G.Ensemble (40,15) 1024 m. Best-G.Ensemble(40,20) 1549 m. Best G.Ensemble(20, 20) 709 m.
  • 67.
    Experimentation Cost Vs.Error Reduction Ensemble(size, iteration) Ex. Time Ensemble (40, 0) 1120 m. Best-G.Ensemble (40,5) 369 m. Best-G.Ensemble (40,10) 709 m. Best-G.Ensemble (40,15) 1024 m. Best-G.Ensemble(40,20) 1549 m. Best G.Ensemble(20, 20) 709 m.
  • 68.
    Conclusions and FutureWork • We proposed a methodology to enhance methodological prediction process, using Genetic Algorithm functions and techniques. • Our method depends on the adjustment of input data set that causes less possible error compared with observations. • We did also experiments on more cases and predictions are enhanced using our method. and we will make more experiments to cover real prediction cases. • In scenarios with a limited number of computing resources, in which EPS could not be used due to its time constraints, G-Ensemble stands to be a good alternative choice. • Thanks to the enhancement in prediction accuracy, more sophisticated schemes might be developed in the near future by injecting observed meteorological variables at run-time.
  • 69.
    Genetic Ensemble (G-Ensemble)for Meteorological Prediction Enhancement Hisham Ihshaish, Ana Cortés, and Miquel A. Senar hisham@caos.uab.es, {ana.cortes,miquelangel.senar}@uab.es Thanks! Questions?
  • 70.
  • 71.
    Meteorological Models • The aim of a meteorological model is to predict the atmospheric state in the future:
  • 72.
    Meteorological Models Now 00:00 Mid Day Midnight Tom.Mid Day t=0 h t=12 h t=24 h t=36 h Initial state Predicted state Predicted state Predicted state 1. surface properties: elevation, land use, vegetation index, temperature of sea surface temperature, ... 2. meteorological variables: temperature, humidity, pressure and wind

Editor's Notes