Pretty much the only thing I think AI could be useful for - forecasting the weather based off tracking massive amounts of data. I look forward to seeing how this particular field of study is improved.

Bonus points, AI weather modeling, for once, saves energy relative to physics models. Pair it with some sort of light weight physical model to keep the hallucinations at bay, and you’ve got a good combo.

  • RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.worksOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 days ago

    It would be amazing if it could have a significant impact on spatial and temporal accuracy of things like rain. I feel like for me the existing weather report is good enough for “it will probably rain tomorrow” but it’s really hit-or-miss when you get to hourly resolution. A good model may be able to go so far as to say “it will probably rain between 3-4pm on the east side of town tomorrow, and 2-3pm on the west side”

    That’s the dream at least. With enough data and a sophisticated enough model it feels like it could be possible.

    • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      8 days ago

      I’m not convinced you can ever get that resolution. There’s a big difference between modeling the broad trends and trying to remove the uncertainty from a process that’s inherently probabilistic.

      • histic@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 days ago

        Theoretically with enough data it could predict exactly what is going to happen do we have enough data currently to do that probably not but weather isn’t just completely random we just don’t understand it enough yet

        • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          8 days ago

          My argument is that that is not the case.

          There are many systems in nature that have randomness fundamentally built in. You can model the broad strokes, but the low level details are inherently unpredictable because random processes are involved at the low level. You can predict the general pattern of airflow over a jet wing, but it’s not a lack of input resolution that makes it impossible to project the path of a specific molecule.

        • futatorius@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          7 days ago

          It’s an insanely complex, coupled system full of turbulence, so that “theoretically” is doing some heavy lifting. The best models now need to be run on supercomputers, despite scores of scientists and software people constantly trying to find further optimizations for the algorithms. AI isn’t going to better discriminate signal from noise when the biggest constraint on the existing S/N ratio is the lack of suffiicient compute resource.

          Furthermore, unless the AI does explainability, which it almost certainly doesn’t, nobody’s going to use its output in life-and-limb-critical applications like first responders, defense, even road gritting.

    • futatorius@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      It would be amazing if it could have a significant impact on spatial and temporal accuracy of things like rain.

      That has to do with the forecast’s grid size, along with some irreducibly complex and ill-conditioned physics that AI won’t help with. The best general-forecast global models now have a 10km grid. Some specialist models go down to about 2km. So, depending on the size of your town, probably not fine-grained enough, though there are also point forecasts that take into account terrain, albedo and other fine-grained features and can be pretty accurate, especially when there are some good observation stations nearby so the forecast models can be continually trained based on actual data.