the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Regionally optimized fire parameterizations using feed-forward neural networks
Abstract. The fire weather index (FWI) is a widely used metric for fire danger based on meteorological observations. However, due to its empirical formulation based on a specific regional relationship between the meteorological observations and fire intensity, the ability of the FWI to accurately represent global satellite-derived fire intensity observations is limited. In this study, we propose a fire parameterization method using feed-forward neural networks (FFNNs) for individual grids. These FFNNs for each grid point utilize four daily meteorological variables (2-meter relative humidity (RH2m), precipitation, 2-meter temperature, and wind speed) as inputs. The outputs of the FFNNs are satellite-derived fire radiative power (FRP) values. Applying the proposed FFNNs for fire parameterization during the 2001–2020 period revealed a marked enhancement in cross-validated skill compared to parameterization solely based on the FWI. This improvement was particularly notable across East Asia, Russia, the eastern US, southern South America, and central Africa. The sensitivity experiments demonstrated that the RH2m is the most critical variable in estimating the FRP and its regional differences via the FFNNs. Conversely, the FWI-based estimations were primarily influenced by precipitation. The FFNNs accurately captured the observed nonlinear correlations between FRP and RH2m, as well as precipitation. In contrast, FWI-based estimations exhibit an excessively negative relationship between FRP and precipitation.
- Preprint
(1253 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(1640 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on esd-2023-26', Anonymous Referee #1, 04 Oct 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2023-26/esd-2023-26-RC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Yoo-Geun Ham, 19 Mar 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2023-26/esd-2023-26-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC1', Yoo-Geun Ham, 19 Mar 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2023-26/esd-2023-26-AC3-supplement.pdf
-
AC4: 'Reply on RC1', Yoo-Geun Ham, 19 Mar 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2023-26/esd-2023-26-AC4-supplement.pdf
- AC5: 'Reply on RC1', Yoo-Geun Ham, 19 Mar 2024
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Yoo-Geun Ham, 19 Mar 2024
-
RC2: 'Comment on esd-2023-26', Anonymous Referee #2, 11 Dec 2023
Review of “Regionally optimized fire parameterizations using feed-forward neural networks” by Ham et al.
General comments: In this paper, the authors argue that a deep learning technique, namely feed-forward neural networks (FFNN) has a high skill in predicting the fire radiative power (FRP) in comparison to the traditional fire weather index (FWI) and a linear regression model. The FFNN model is trained with the meteorological variables of 2-m relative humidity (RH2m), precipitation, 2-m temperature, and windspeed). The authors propose that the FFNN-based technique can be a better fire parameterization for the weather models. Overall, this is an interesting manuscript. However, I have some concerns that the authors must address before accepting the manuscript. My concerns are listed below.
Specific comments:
- The manuscript seems to be written as a letter, with only four figures in the main manuscript. I don’t think that ESD has a restriction on the number of figures in the main manuscript. So, consider moving some of the supplementary information to the main manuscript. The model architecture needs to be shown in the main manuscript.
- The training and validation functions are not shown. It is important to show the training and validation curves to see if the model does overfit/underfit. Overall, the methods need more clarity.
- The authors compare FFNN with a linear regression model. Why not compare it against an existing parameterization scheme?
- I find the following paper relevant for this study. Zhang et al. (2021) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107735
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-2023-26-RC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Yoo-Geun Ham, 19 Mar 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2023-26/esd-2023-26-AC2-supplement.pdf
- AC6: 'Reply on RC2', Yoo-Geun Ham, 19 Mar 2024
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on esd-2023-26', Anonymous Referee #1, 04 Oct 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2023-26/esd-2023-26-RC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Yoo-Geun Ham, 19 Mar 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2023-26/esd-2023-26-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC1', Yoo-Geun Ham, 19 Mar 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2023-26/esd-2023-26-AC3-supplement.pdf
-
AC4: 'Reply on RC1', Yoo-Geun Ham, 19 Mar 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2023-26/esd-2023-26-AC4-supplement.pdf
- AC5: 'Reply on RC1', Yoo-Geun Ham, 19 Mar 2024
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Yoo-Geun Ham, 19 Mar 2024
-
RC2: 'Comment on esd-2023-26', Anonymous Referee #2, 11 Dec 2023
Review of “Regionally optimized fire parameterizations using feed-forward neural networks” by Ham et al.
General comments: In this paper, the authors argue that a deep learning technique, namely feed-forward neural networks (FFNN) has a high skill in predicting the fire radiative power (FRP) in comparison to the traditional fire weather index (FWI) and a linear regression model. The FFNN model is trained with the meteorological variables of 2-m relative humidity (RH2m), precipitation, 2-m temperature, and windspeed). The authors propose that the FFNN-based technique can be a better fire parameterization for the weather models. Overall, this is an interesting manuscript. However, I have some concerns that the authors must address before accepting the manuscript. My concerns are listed below.
Specific comments:
- The manuscript seems to be written as a letter, with only four figures in the main manuscript. I don’t think that ESD has a restriction on the number of figures in the main manuscript. So, consider moving some of the supplementary information to the main manuscript. The model architecture needs to be shown in the main manuscript.
- The training and validation functions are not shown. It is important to show the training and validation curves to see if the model does overfit/underfit. Overall, the methods need more clarity.
- The authors compare FFNN with a linear regression model. Why not compare it against an existing parameterization scheme?
- I find the following paper relevant for this study. Zhang et al. (2021) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107735
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-2023-26-RC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Yoo-Geun Ham, 19 Mar 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2023-26/esd-2023-26-AC2-supplement.pdf
- AC6: 'Reply on RC2', Yoo-Geun Ham, 19 Mar 2024
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
452 | 118 | 54 | 624 | 51 | 41 | 33 |
- HTML: 452
- PDF: 118
- XML: 54
- Total: 624
- Supplement: 51
- BibTeX: 41
- EndNote: 33
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1