e-ISSN: Pending
Negative / Null Result ReportOpen accessEnvironmental Science· cited by 15

Skilful global seasonal predictions from a machine learning weather model trained on reanalysis data

Chris Kent; Adam A. Scaife; Nick Dunstone; Doug Smith; Steven C. Hardiman; Tom Dunstan; Oliver Watt‐Meyer · 2025 · npj Climate and Atmospheric Science

WASTE classifies this as Negative / Null Result Report · AI classification, approximate

The study found no significant effect — useful as a negative control or null benchmark for your own design.

Abstract

Abstract Machine learning weather models trained on observed atmospheric conditions can outperform conventional physics-based models at short- to medium-range (1–14 day) forecast timescales. Here we take the machine learning model ACE2, trained to predict 6-hourly steps in atmospheric evolution and which can remain stable over long forecast periods, and assess it from a seasonal forecasting perspective (1–3 month lead time). Applying persisted sea surface temperature (SST) and sea-ice anomalies centred on 1 st November each year, we initialise a lagged ensemble of seasonal predictions covering

Abstract by Chris Kent; Adam A. Scaife; Nick Dunstone; Doug Smith; Steven C. Hardiman; Tom Dunstan; Oliver Watt‐Meyer, npj Climate and Atmospheric Science (2025) — licensed CC BY 4.0.

About to run something similar?

Run an AI Precheck on your own design to catch failure modes like this one before you spend the time. Your first desk check is free.

WASTE indexes this work — it does not host or republish it. Failure-type classification is automated and approximate.

Metadata source: OpenAlex · DOI 10.1038/s41612-025-01198-3