4.7 Article

Machine Learning Approaches for Detecting Tropical Cyclone Formation Using Satellite Data

期刊

REMOTE SENSING
卷 11, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/rs11101195

关键词

tropical cyclone formation; WindSat; machine learning

资金

  1. Korea Meteorological Administration Research and Development Program [KMI2017-02410]
  2. Next-Generation Information Computing Development Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Ministry of Science, ICT [NRF-2016M3C4A7952637]
  3. Disaster-Safety Industry Promotion Program - Ministry of Interior and Safety (MOIS), Korea [2019-MOIS32-015]
  4. Ministry of Science and ICT (MSIT), Korea, under the Information Technology Research Center (ITRC) support program [IITP-2019-2018-0-01424]
  5. Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries, Korea

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study compared detection skill for tropical cyclone (TC) formation using models based on three different machine learning (ML) algorithms-decision trees (DT), random forest (RF), and support vector machines (SVM)-and a model based on Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA). Eight predictors were derived from WindSat satellite measurements of ocean surface wind and precipitation over the western North Pacific for 2005-2009. All of the ML approaches performed better with significantly higher hit rates ranging from 94 to 96% compared with LDA performance (77%), although false alarm rate by MLs is slightly higher (21-28%) than that by LDA (13%). Besides, MLs could detect TC formation at the time as early as 26-30 h before the first time diagnosed as tropical depression by the JTWC best track, which was also 5 to 9 h earlier than that by LDA. The skill differences across MLs were relatively smaller than difference between MLs and LDA. Large yearly variation in forecast lead time was common in all models due to the limitation in sampling from orbiting satellite. This study highlights that ML approaches provide an improved skill for detecting TC formation compared with conventional linear approaches.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据