Limitation of super-resolution machine learning approach to precipitation downscaling

The present study explores the potential of super-resolution machine learning (ML) models for precipitation downscaling from 100 to 12.5 km at hourly timescale using the Conformal Cubic Atmospheric Model (CCAM) data over the Australian domain. Two approaches were examined: the perfect approach, which trains the ML model using coarsened high-resolution data as input (i.e., CCAM 12.5 km data coarsened to 100 km), and the imperfect approach, which uses original coarse-resolution data as input (i.e., CCAM model simulation at 100 km resolution) and in both the cases high-resolution data (i.e., CCAM 12.5 km simulation) is used as target. In the perfect case, the ML model (ML<sub>Perfect</sub>) accurately reproduces high-resolution climatology and extremes. However, the ML<sub>Perfect</sub> model with CCAM 100 km simulation data as input (i.e., in the imperfect setting) underestimates the magnitude of the output and introduces spatial inconsistencies, while the ML<sub>Imperfect</sub> model captures high-resolution structures but underestimates extremes. This suggests that the super-resolution ML<sub>Perfect</sub> model approach is inappropriate for precipitation downscaling because of the spatial inconsistencies between the coarse and high-resolution simulations. Additionally, we introduced sensitivity-based diagnostics beyond standard evaluation methods to understand model behaviour and identify structural issues. These diagnostics reveal that both models increase precipitation inputs non-linearly without creating spurious spatial relationships. However, the ML<sub>Imperfect</sub> model outputs precipitation in high-altitude regions regardless of input, highlighting the structural issue of the ML<sub>Imperfect</sub> model. Our study highlights the challenges in using super-resolution ML models for precipitation downscaling, introduces several useful diagnostics for assessing the super-resolution ML models and their physical realism, and provides ideas to explore to improve ML-based precipitation downscaling.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2025-08-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-05880-7
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Climate variability and models
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.21

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Limitation of super-resolution machine learning approach to precipitation downscaling

Richard J. Matear, P. Jyoteeshkumar Reddy, Marcus Thatcher, John Taylor
2 citations
Scientific Reports
Climate variability and models
2.21
article

Limitation of super-resolution machine learning approach to precipitation downscaling

Richard J. Matear, P. Jyoteeshkumar Reddy, Marcus Thatcher, John Taylor
article en
2 citations

Abstract

The present study explores the potential of super-resolution machine learning (ML) models for precipitation downscaling from 100 to 12.5 km at hourly timescale using the Conformal Cubic Atmospheric Model (CCAM) data over the Australian domain. Two approaches were examined: the perfect approach, which trains the ML model using coarsened high-resolution data as input (i.e., CCAM 12.5 km data coarsened to 100 km), and the imperfect approach, which uses original coarse-resolution data as input (i.e., CCAM model simulation at 100 km resolution) and in both the cases high-resolution data (i.e., CCAM 12.5 km simulation) is used as target. In the perfect case, the ML model (ML<sub>Perfect</sub>) accurately reproduces high-resolution climatology and extremes. However, the ML<sub>Perfect</sub> model with CCAM 100 km simulation data as input (i.e., in the imperfect setting) underestimates the magnitude of the output and introduces spatial inconsistencies, while the ML<sub>Imperfect</sub> model captures high-resolution structures but underestimates extremes. This suggests that the super-resolution ML<sub>Perfect</sub> model approach is inappropriate for precipitation downscaling because of the spatial inconsistencies between the coarse and high-resolution simulations. Additionally, we introduced sensitivity-based diagnostics beyond standard evaluation methods to understand model behaviour and identify structural issues. These diagnostics reveal that both models increase precipitation inputs non-linearly without creating spurious spatial relationships. However, the ML<sub>Imperfect</sub> model outputs precipitation in high-altitude regions regardless of input, highlighting the structural issue of the ML<sub>Imperfect</sub> model. Our study highlights the challenges in using super-resolution ML models for precipitation downscaling, introduces several useful diagnostics for assessing the super-resolution ML models and their physical realism, and provides ideas to explore to improve ML-based precipitation downscaling.

Scientific ReportsVol. 15(1)
Australian National University (AU), Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (AU)
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, National Cancer Institute
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Climate variability and models
2.21
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.