atmospheric data analysts

Abstract: Despite their high accuracy on point-wise metrics, machine learning weather forecasting models can exhibit different failure modes such as blurring, periodic irregularities, and other unphysical spatial artifacts. This has motivated a variety of metrics to detect known failure cases. Existing metrics fix a representation or transformation in advance, and that choice limits the artifacts they can detect. We propose to train a discriminator for separating reference data from the model's output, and using its output logit to obtain a divergence-like realism score. The discriminator learns whatever separates the model's fields from real weather, adapting to whichever failure mode that model exhibits. We compare our learned atmospheric critic to existing metrics using various synthetic corruptions applied to ERA5 reanalysis data. Our method successfully identifies the corruptions and ranks their severity, while existing metrics fail on at least one corruption. Additionally, we evaluate forecasts from real weather models, and find that the realism score degrades with longer lead times and the metric generally assigns higher realism to numerical models than to machine learning models.

Abstract: Next-day wildfire prediction requires models whose forecasts can be evaluated alongside the assumptions and historical evidence used in their computation. Although deep learning can learn spatial patterns from remote-sensing data, predictive performance alone does not establish physical fidelity or operational trustworthiness. This study investigates three modular augmentations for next-day active-fire prediction: wind- and slope-conditioned attention biases, physics-feature retrieval-augmented output correction, and fire conditioned dual-stream gating. The attention biases expose prescribed directional preferences, while the retrieval module selects historical tiles using a nine-dimensional environmental and fire-state descriptor and applies a learned correction to a frozen model's logits. The modules are evaluated across five backbones on the Next Day Wildfire Spread benchmark, using staged ablations, directional audits, retrieval perturbations, calibration measures, and computational comparisons. The three-seed mean F1 score and area under the precision--recall curve (AUC-PR) of a SwinUNETR model with all three augmentations are 0.4216 and 0.3673. Then, a mixed ensemble (two augmented architectures and one non-augmented architecture) model achieves 0.4292 and 0.3790. Benefits vary across architectures, and retrieval-related improvements in AUC-PR do not consistently translate into higher F1. The constructed wind bias aligns closely with input wind, but its alignment with observed next-day fire displacement is much weaker, distinguishing prior inspectability from predictive physical fidelity. The study contributes a framework for exposing and evaluating selected domain-informed components within wildfire prediction models. Together, the results presented show that predictive performance, operational trustworthiness, and computational practicality need not be competing objectives.