the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Bounded Transport-Residual Closure for Solver-Coupled Graph-Based Global Atmospheric Forecasting
Abstract. Solver-coupled learning offers a structured alternative to direct state-to-state regression for global atmospheric forecasting, but its forecast quality depends on how accurately the embedded coefficient dynamics represent unresolved forcing and coarse-grid numerical effects. We represent these unresolved effects using a bounded transport-residual closure (BTRC) embedded in an explicit sub-stepping solver. Building on the reduced horizontal transport-coefficient dynamics of PASSAT, we separate a retained spherical advection–curvature operator from aggregate terms omitted, approximated, or numerically distorted by the reduced model, including pressure-gradient, Coriolis, frictional, subgrid, vertical-coupling, and discretization contributions. A graph network estimates a raw aggregate equation discrepancy, which is mapped through a scaled hyperbolic tangent to obtain the BTRC. The resulting closure is inserted into the coefficient-update pathway and modifies the transport coefficients used by subsequent atmospheric state updates. The bound limits the direct closure-induced coefficient increment per Euler sub-step to δtτ, providing a numerical safeguard against unconstrained learned forcing; it is not presented as a proof of global dynamical stability. The BTRC is shared across prognostic channels as a compact directional correction, while an auxiliary node-level gated wavelet branch refines multi-resolution graph features. Experiments on coarse-resolution ERA5 data under WeatherBench-style protocols show the clearest gains for temperature and 500-hPa geopotential (Z500). Near-surface wind fields exhibit more consistent improvements in ACC than in RMSE, and the latter gains are small or not uniformly positive. A residual-free control, Rt ≡ 0~, provides targeted evidence that the learned in-solver BTRC materially contributes to the long-lead improvements within the evaluated setting. These results support bounded transport-residual learning as a promising mechanism for improving autoregressive behavior in reduced solver-coupled atmospheric models.
- Preprint
(3503 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 07 Dec 2026)
-
CEC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-4741 - No compliance with the policy of the journal', Juan Antonio Añel, 30 Oct 2026
reply
-
AC1: 'Reply on CEC1', Chaorong Li, 31 Oct 2026
reply
Dear Dr. Añel,
Thank you for bringing this issue to our attention.
We have now deposited the datasets used in our study and the trained model weights in permanent repositories to ensure their accessibility, reproducibility, and long-term preservation.
The relevant repository information is provided below:
-
Model weights:
Chuanhu, D. (2026). BTRC best model weights. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23827834
-
Datasets:
https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.34874688
Both datasets and model weights are now available through repositories with persistent DOIs, allowing reviewers and readers to access the resources and reproduce our results.
We will update the "Code and Data Availability" section of the manuscript accordingly and include both repository records as formal references in the bibliography.
We sincerely apologize for the oversight and appreciate your guidance in helping us ensure compliance with GMD's Code and Data Policy.
Thank you for your consideration.
Best regards,
The Authors
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-4741-AC1 -
CEC2: 'Reply on AC1', Juan Antonio Añel, 31 Oct 2026
reply
Dear authors,
Many thanks for your reply. Unfortunately, it does not satisfy the requirements of the policy, as the file that you provide does not seem to contain the original ERA5 data used in your study. Also, being a Python path file with binary data you need to provide the Python version necessary to read it to ensure future readability of the file.
Therefore, please, reply to this comment with a new repository that contains the requested data and a new Code and Data Availability section.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-4741-CEC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on CEC2', Chaorong Li, 01 Nov 2026
reply
Dear Dr. Añel,
Thank you for bringing this issue to our attention.
Following your comments, we have reorganized and deposited our code, trained model weights, and datasets in public repositories to improve data accessibility, reproducibility, and long-term preservation.
The updated repository information is provided below:
-
Code and model weights:
The code and trained model weights have been deposited in Zenodo:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23827833-
Datasets:
The six NetCDF (.nc) files used in our study have been deposited in Figshare:
https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.34874688We would also like to clarify the origin and processing of the meteorological data. The datasets were obtained from the official WeatherBench data repository (https://github.com/pangeo-data/WeatherBench), which is based on ERA5 reanalysis data from ECMWF. Specifically, we used the 5.625° resolution data, including 2 m temperature, 10 m u- and v-components of wind, geopotential at 500 hPa, temperature at 850 hPa, and static geographical variables (constants).
As documented in the official WeatherBench repository, the processed datasets were generated from the ERA5 archive by downloading monthly ERA5 files and subsequently regridding them to the required spatial resolutions using the scripts src/download.py and src/regrid.py. Additional scripts are provided for extracting individual pressure levels and processing static geographical fields. The complete data processing workflow and source code are publicly available in the WeatherBench GitHub repository.
The six NetCDF files deposited in Figshare are the original files downloaded from the WeatherBench data repository, without modification after downloading. We have also supplemented the Figshare record with a detailed description of the data source, processing workflow, variables, spatial resolution, and file format.
Regarding the file readability, all six files are standard NetCDF files rather than Python-specific serialized binary files. They can be accessed using standard NetCDF-compatible tools, such as Python xarray and netCDF4, and do not require a specific Python version for reading.
We will update the "Code and Data Availability" section of the manuscript accordingly and include the corresponding repository records and references in the bibliography.
We sincerely appreciate your comments and guidance. We hope these updates address the concerns regarding data accessibility, reproducibility, and compliance with GMD's Code and Data Policy.
Best regards,
The Authors
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-4741-AC2 -
-
AC2: 'Reply on CEC2', Chaorong Li, 01 Nov 2026
reply
-
-
AC1: 'Reply on CEC1', Chaorong Li, 31 Oct 2026
reply
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 225 | 81 | 27 | 333 | 31 | 30 |
- HTML: 225
- PDF: 81
- XML: 27
- Total: 333
- BibTeX: 31
- EndNote: 30
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
Dear authors,
Unfortunately, after checking your manuscript, it has come to our attention that it does not comply with our "Code and Data Policy".
https://www.geoscientific-model-development.net/policies/code_and_data_policy.html
First, in your work you use ERA5 data; however, you do not provide in the Code and Data Availability section of your manuscript a repository containing the data used. You must include one. Here I should note that we can not accept that you provide a link to the Copernicus Data Store. Also, you cite a site from the Technical University of Munich to access part of the data, which is not an acceptable repository. It does not fulfil GMD’s requirements for a persistent data archive because:
It does not appear to have a published policy for data preservation over many years or decades (some flexibility exists over the precise length of preservation, but the policy must exist).
It does not appear to have a published mechanism for preventing authors from unilaterally removing material. Archives must have a policy which makes removal of materials only possible in exceptional circumstances and subject to an independent curatorial decision,
It does not appear to issue a persistent identifier such as a DOI or Handle for each precise dataset.
If we have missed a published policy which does in fact address this matter satisfactorily, please post a response linking to it. If you have any questions about this issue, please post them in a reply.
Also, you should provide the model weights in an acceptable repository.
The GMD review and publication process depends on reviewers and community commentators being able to access, during the discussion phase, the code and data on which a manuscript depends, and on ensuring the provenance of replicability of the published papers for years after their publication. Please, therefore, publish your code and data in one of the appropriate repositories and reply to this comment with the relevant information (link and a permanent identifier for it (e.g. DOI)) as soon as possible. We cannot have manuscripts under discussion that do not comply with our policy.
Later, if the Topical Editor decides to continue with the review or publication process of your manuscript and you are requested to upload a new version of it, then The 'Code and Data Availability’ section of your manuscript must also be modified to cite the new repository locations, and corresponding references added to the bibliography.
I must note that if you do not fix this problem, we cannot continue with the peer-review process or accept your manuscript for publication in GMD.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor