Search

While autoregressive machine-learning-based emulators have been trained to produce stable and accurate rollouts in the climate of the present-day and recent past, none so far have been trained to emulate the sensitivity of climate to substantial changes in CO$_2$ or other greenhouse gases. As an initial step we couple the Ai2 Climate Emulator version 2 to a slab ocean model (hereafter ACE2-SOM) and train it on output from a collection of equilibrium-climate physics-based reference simulations with varying levels of CO$_2$. We test it in equilibrium and non-equilibrium climate scenarios with CO$_2$ concentrations seen and unseen in training. ACE2-SOM performs well in equilibrium-climate inference with both in-sample and out-of-sample CO$_2$ concentrations, accurately reproducing the emergent time-mean spatial patterns of surface temperature and precipitation change with CO$_2$ doubling, tripling, or quadrupling. In addition, the vertical profile of atmospheric warming and change in extreme precipitation rates up to the 99.9999th percentile closely agree with the reference model. Non-equilibrium-climate inference is more challenging. With CO$_2$ increasing gradually at a rate of 2% year$^{-1}$, ACE2-SOM can accurately emulate the global annual mean trends of surface and lower-to-middle atmosphere fields but produces unphysical jumps in stratospheric fields. With an abrupt quadrupling of CO$_2$, ML-controlled fields transition unrealistically quickly to the 4xCO$_2$ regime. In doing so they violate global energy conservation and exhibit unphysical sensitivities of and surface and top of atmosphere radiative fluxes to instantaneous changes in CO$_2$. Future emulator development needed to address these issues should improve its generalizability to diverse climate change scenarios., Comment: 31 pages, 13 figures

Existing machine learning models of weather variability are not formulated to enable assessment of their response to varying external boundary conditions such as sea surface temperature and greenhouse gases. Here we present ACE2 (Ai2 Climate Emulator version 2) and its application to reproducing atmospheric variability over the past 80 years on timescales from days to decades. ACE2 is a 450M-parameter autoregressive machine learning emulator, operating with 6-hour temporal resolution, 1{\deg} horizontal resolution and eight vertical layers. It exactly conserves global dry air mass and moisture and can be stepped forward stably for arbitrarily many steps with a throughput of about 1500 simulated years per wall clock day. ACE2 generates emergent phenomena such as tropical cyclones, the Madden Julian Oscillation, and sudden stratospheric warmings. Furthermore, it accurately reproduces the atmospheric response to El Ni\~no variability and global trends of temperature over the past 80 years. However, its sensitivities to separately changing sea surface temperature and carbon dioxide are not entirely realistic., Comment: 31 pages, 23 figures

Due to computational constraints, running global climate models (GCMs) for many years requires a lower spatial grid resolution (${\gtrsim}50$ km) than is optimal for accurately resolving important physical processes. Such processes are approximated in GCMs via subgrid parameterizations, which contribute significantly to the uncertainty in GCM predictions. One approach to improving the accuracy of a coarse-grid global climate model is to add machine-learned state-dependent corrections at each simulation timestep, such that the climate model evolves more like a high-resolution global storm-resolving model (GSRM). We train neural networks to learn the state-dependent temperature, humidity, and radiative flux corrections needed to nudge a 200 km coarse-grid climate model to the evolution of a 3~km fine-grid GSRM. When these corrective ML models are coupled to a year-long coarse-grid climate simulation, the time-mean spatial pattern errors are reduced by 6-25% for land surface temperature and 9-25% for land surface precipitation with respect to a no-ML baseline simulation. The ML-corrected simulations develop other biases in climate and circulation that differ from, but have comparable amplitude to, the baseline simulation.

Cloud microphysical parameterizations in atmospheric models describe the formation and evolution of clouds and precipitation, a central weather and climate process. Cloud-associated latent heating is a primary driver of large and small-scale circulations throughout the global atmosphere, and clouds have important interactions with atmospheric radiation. Clouds are ubiquitous, diverse, and can change rapidly. In this work, we build the first emulator of an entire cloud microphysical parameterization, including fast phase changes. The emulator performs well in offline and online (i.e. when coupled to the rest of the atmospheric model) tests, but shows some developing biases in Antarctica. Sensitivity tests demonstrate that these successes require careful modeling of the mixed discrete-continuous output as well as the input-output structure of the underlying code and physical process., Comment: Accepted at the Machine Learning and the Physical Sciences Workshop at the 36th conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) December 3, 2022

Climate models are complicated software systems that approximate atmospheric and oceanic fluid mechanics at a coarse spatial resolution. Typical climate forecasts only explicitly resolve processes larger than 100 km and approximate any process occurring below this scale (e.g. thunderstorms) using so-called parametrizations. Machine learning could improve upon the accuracy of some traditional physical parametrizations by learning from so-called global cloud-resolving models. We compare the performance of two machine learning models, random forests (RF) and neural networks (NNs), at parametrizing the aggregate effect of moist physics in a 3 km resolution global simulation with an atmospheric model. The NN outperforms the RF when evaluated offline on a testing dataset. However, when the ML models are coupled to an atmospheric model run at 200 km resolution, the NN-assisted simulation crashes with 7 days, while the RF-assisted simulations remain stable. Both runs produce more accurate weather forecasts than a baseline configuration, but globally averaged climate variables drift over longer timescales.