Articles | Volume 21, issue 1
https://doi.org/10.5194/os-21-113-2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Special issue:
https://doi.org/10.5194/os-21-113-2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Convolutional neural networks for sea surface data assimilation in operational ocean models: test case in the Gulf of Mexico
Department of Scientific Computing, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306, USA
Center for Ocean–Atmospheric Prediction Studies, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306, USA
Alexandra Bozec
Center for Ocean–Atmospheric Prediction Studies, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306, USA
Eric P. Chassignet
Center for Ocean–Atmospheric Prediction Studies, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306, USA
Jose R. Miranda
Department of Scientific Computing, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306, USA
Center for Ocean–Atmospheric Prediction Studies, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306, USA
Related authors
No articles found.
Yann Drillet, Matthew Martin, Yasumasa Miyazawa, Mike Bell, Eric Chassignet, and Stefania Ciliberti
State Planet Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/sp-2024-38, https://doi.org/10.5194/sp-2024-38, 2024
Revised manuscript under review for SP
Short summary
Short summary
This article describes the various stages of research and development that have been carried out over the last few decades to produce an operational reference service for global ocean monitoring and forecasting.
Ibrahim Hoteit, Eric Chassignet, and Mike Bell
State Planet Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/sp-2024-10, https://doi.org/10.5194/sp-2024-10, 2024
Revised manuscript under review for SP
Short summary
Short summary
This paper explores how using multiple predictions instead of just one can improve ocean forecasts and help prepare for changes in ocean conditions. By combining different forecasts, scientists can better understand the uncertainty in predictions, leading to more reliable forecasts and better decision-making. This method is useful for responding to hazards like oil spills, improving climate forecasts, and supporting decision-making in fields like marine safety and resource management.
Marina Tonani, Eric Chassignet, Mauro Cirano, Yasumasa Miyazawa, and Begoña Pérez Gómez
State Planet Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/sp-2024-30, https://doi.org/10.5194/sp-2024-30, 2024
Revised manuscript accepted for SP
Short summary
Short summary
This article provides an overview of the main characteristics of ocean forecast systems covering a limited region of the ocean. Their main components are described, as well as the spatial and temporal scales they resolve. The oceanic variables that these systems are able to predict are also explained. An overview of the main forecasting systems currently in operation is also provided.
Qiang Wang, Qi Shu, Alexandra Bozec, Eric P. Chassignet, Pier Giuseppe Fogli, Baylor Fox-Kemper, Andy McC. Hogg, Doroteaciro Iovino, Andrew E. Kiss, Nikolay Koldunov, Julien Le Sommer, Yiwen Li, Pengfei Lin, Hailong Liu, Igor Polyakov, Patrick Scholz, Dmitry Sidorenko, Shizhu Wang, and Xiaobiao Xu
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 347–379, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-347-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-347-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Increasing resolution improves model skills in simulating the Arctic Ocean, but other factors such as parameterizations and numerics are at least of the same importance for obtaining reliable simulations.
Stefania A. Ciliberti, Enrique Alvarez Fanjul, Jay Pearlman, Kirsten Wilmer-Becker, Pierre Bahurel, Fabrice Ardhuin, Alain Arnaud, Mike Bell, Segolene Berthou, Laurent Bertino, Arthur Capet, Eric Chassignet, Stefano Ciavatta, Mauro Cirano, Emanuela Clementi, Gianpiero Cossarini, Gianpaolo Coro, Stuart Corney, Fraser Davidson, Marie Drevillon, Yann Drillet, Renaud Dussurget, Ghada El Serafy, Katja Fennel, Marcos Garcia Sotillo, Patrick Heimbach, Fabrice Hernandez, Patrick Hogan, Ibrahim Hoteit, Sudheer Joseph, Simon Josey, Pierre-Yves Le Traon, Simone Libralato, Marco Mancini, Pascal Matte, Angelique Melet, Yasumasa Miyazawa, Andrew M. Moore, Antonio Novellino, Andrew Porter, Heather Regan, Laia Romero, Andreas Schiller, John Siddorn, Joanna Staneva, Cecile Thomas-Courcoux, Marina Tonani, Jose Maria Garcia-Valdecasas, Jennifer Veitch, Karina von Schuckmann, Liying Wan, John Wilkin, and Romane Zufic
State Planet, 1-osr7, 2, https://doi.org/10.5194/sp-1-osr7-2-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/sp-1-osr7-2-2023, 2023
Anne Marie Treguier, Clement de Boyer Montégut, Alexandra Bozec, Eric P. Chassignet, Baylor Fox-Kemper, Andy McC. Hogg, Doroteaciro Iovino, Andrew E. Kiss, Julien Le Sommer, Yiwen Li, Pengfei Lin, Camille Lique, Hailong Liu, Guillaume Serazin, Dmitry Sidorenko, Qiang Wang, Xiaobio Xu, and Steve Yeager
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 3849–3872, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3849-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3849-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The ocean mixed layer is the interface between the ocean interior and the atmosphere and plays a key role in climate variability. We evaluate the performance of the new generation of ocean models for climate studies, designed to resolve
ocean eddies, which are the largest source of ocean variability and modulate the mixed-layer properties. We find that the mixed-layer depth is better represented in eddy-rich models but, unfortunately, not uniformly across the globe and not in all models.
Eric P. Chassignet, Stephen G. Yeager, Baylor Fox-Kemper, Alexandra Bozec, Frederic Castruccio, Gokhan Danabasoglu, Christopher Horvat, Who M. Kim, Nikolay Koldunov, Yiwen Li, Pengfei Lin, Hailong Liu, Dmitry V. Sein, Dmitry Sidorenko, Qiang Wang, and Xiaobiao Xu
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 4595–4637, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4595-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4595-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
This paper presents global comparisons of fundamental global climate variables from a suite of four pairs of matched low- and high-resolution ocean and sea ice simulations to assess the robustness of climate-relevant improvements in ocean simulations associated with moving from coarse (∼1°) to eddy-resolving (∼0.1°) horizontal resolutions. Despite significant improvements, greatly enhanced horizontal resolution does not deliver unambiguous bias reduction in all regions for all models.
Hiroyuki Tsujino, L. Shogo Urakawa, Stephen M. Griffies, Gokhan Danabasoglu, Alistair J. Adcroft, Arthur E. Amaral, Thomas Arsouze, Mats Bentsen, Raffaele Bernardello, Claus W. Böning, Alexandra Bozec, Eric P. Chassignet, Sergey Danilov, Raphael Dussin, Eleftheria Exarchou, Pier Giuseppe Fogli, Baylor Fox-Kemper, Chuncheng Guo, Mehmet Ilicak, Doroteaciro Iovino, Who M. Kim, Nikolay Koldunov, Vladimir Lapin, Yiwen Li, Pengfei Lin, Keith Lindsay, Hailong Liu, Matthew C. Long, Yoshiki Komuro, Simon J. Marsland, Simona Masina, Aleksi Nummelin, Jan Klaus Rieck, Yohan Ruprich-Robert, Markus Scheinert, Valentina Sicardi, Dmitry Sidorenko, Tatsuo Suzuki, Hiroaki Tatebe, Qiang Wang, Stephen G. Yeager, and Zipeng Yu
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 3643–3708, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-3643-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-3643-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The OMIP-2 framework for global ocean–sea-ice model simulations is assessed by comparing multi-model means from 11 CMIP6-class global ocean–sea-ice models calculated separately for the OMIP-1 and OMIP-2 simulations. Many features are very similar between OMIP-1 and OMIP-2 simulations, and yet key improvements in transitioning from OMIP-1 to OMIP-2 are also identified. Thus, the present assessment justifies that future ocean–sea-ice model development and analysis studies use the OMIP-2 framework.
Taylor A. Shropshire, Steven L. Morey, Eric P. Chassignet, Alexandra Bozec, Victoria J. Coles, Michael R. Landry, Rasmus Swalethorp, Glenn Zapfe, and Michael R. Stukel
Biogeosciences, 17, 3385–3407, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-3385-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-3385-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Zooplankton are the smallest animals in the ocean and important food for fish. Despite their importance, zooplankton have been relatively undersampled. To better understand the zooplankton community in the Gulf of Mexico (GoM), we developed a model to simulate their dynamics. We found that heterotrophic protists are important for supporting mesozooplankton, which are the primary prey of larval fish. The model developed in this study has the potential to improve fisheries management in the GoM.
Related subject area
Approach: Data Assimilation | Properties and processes: Mesoscale to submesoscale dynamics
Dynamical reconstruction of the upper-ocean state in the central Arctic during the winter period of the MOSAiC expedition
Ivan Kuznetsov, Benjamin Rabe, Alexey Androsov, Ying-Chih Fang, Mario Hoppmann, Alejandra Quintanilla-Zurita, Sven Harig, Sandra Tippenhauer, Kirstin Schulz, Volker Mohrholz, Ilker Fer, Vera Fofonova, and Markus Janout
Ocean Sci., 20, 759–777, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-20-759-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/os-20-759-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Our research introduces a tool for dynamically mapping the Arctic Ocean using data from the MOSAiC experiment. Incorporating extensive data into a model clarifies the ocean's structure and movement. Our findings on temperature, salinity, and currents reveal how water layers mix and identify areas of intense water movement. This enhances understanding of Arctic Ocean dynamics and supports climate impact studies. Our work is vital for comprehending this key region in global climate science.
Cited articles
Agrawal, S., Barrington, L., Bromberg, C., Burge, J., Gazen, C., and Hickey, J.: Machine learning for precipitation nowcasting from radar images, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1912.12132, 11 December 2019. a
Beauchamp, M., Bocquet, M., and Fablet, R.: Multimodal 4DVarNets for the reconstruction of sea surface dynamics from SST-SSH synergies, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2203.06003, 11 March 2022. a
Boukabara, S.-A., Krasnopolsky, V., Stewart, J. Q., Maddy, E. S., Shahroudi, N., and Hoffman, R. N.: Leveraging modern artificial intelligence for remote sensing and NWP: Benefits and challenges, B. Am. Meteor. Soc., 100, ES473–ES491, 2019. a
Bozec, A., Chassignet, E. P., and Srinivasan, A.: GOMb0.04 Reanalysis for the Gulf of Mexico, https://www.hycom.org/data/gomb0pt04/gom-reanalysis (last access: 21 January 2025), 2025. a
Chassignet, E. P., Hurlburt, H. E., Smedstad, O. M., Halliwell, G. R., Hogan, P. J., Wallcraft, A. J., Baraille, R., and Bleck, R.: The HYCOM (hybrid coordinate ocean model) data assimilative system, J. Mar. Syst., 65, 60–83, 2007. a
Chassignet, E. P., Hurlburt, H. E., Metzger, E. J., Smedstad, O. M., Cummings, J. A., Halliwell, G. R., Bleck, R., Baraille, R., Wallcraft, A. J., Lozano, C., et al.: US GODAE: global ocean prediction with the HYbrid Coordinate Ocean Model (HYCOM), Oceanography, 22, 64–75, 2009. a
Cooper, M. and Haines, K.: Altimetric assimilation with water property conservation, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 101, 1059–1077, 1996. a
Daudt, R. C., Le Saux, B., Boulch, A., and Gousseau, Y.: Fully Convolutional Siamese Networks for Change Detection, in: IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP), Athens, Greece, 6 September 2018, 4063–4067, https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIP.2018.8451652, 2018. a
Davis, M.: Stochastic modelling and control, Springer Science & Business Media, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-4828-0, 2013. a
Demir, I., Koperski, K., Lindenbaum, D., Pang, G., Huang, J., Basu, S., Hughes, F., Tuia, D., and Raskar, R.: DeepGlobe 2018: A Challenge to Parse the Earth through Satellite Images, in: CVPR Workshops, Salt Lake City, June 2018, 172–181, 2018. a
Dong, R., Leng, H., Zhao, J., Song, J., and Liang, S.: A Framework for Four-Dimensional Variational Data Assimilation Based on Machine Learning, Entropy, 24, 264, https://doi.org/10.3390/e24020264, 2022. a
Evensen, G.: The ensemble Kalman filter: Theoretical formulation and practical implementation, Ocean Dynam., 53, 343–367, 2003. a
Geer, A. J.: Learning Earth System Models from Observations: Machine Learning or Data Assimilation?, Philos. T. Roy. Soc. A, 379, 20200089, https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2020.0089, 2021. a
Guinehut, S., Le Traon, P. Y., Larnicol, G., and Philipps, S.: Combining Argo and remote-sensing data to estimate the ocean three-dimensional temperature fields–a first approach based on simulated observations, J. Mar. Syst., 46, 85–98, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmarsys.2003.11.022, 2004. a
Kingma, D. P. and Ba, J.: Adam: A method for stochastic optimization, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1412.6980, 22 December 2014. a
Krasnopolsky, V.: The Application of Neural Networks in the Earth System Sciences: Neural Network Emulations for Complex Multidimensional Mappings, vol. 46 of Atmospheric and Oceanic Science Library, Springer, Dordrecht, Heidelberg, New York, London, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6073-8, 2013. a
LeCun, Y., Bottou, L., Bengio, Y., and Haffner, P.: Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition, P. IEEE, 86, 2278–2324, 1998. a
Lguensat, R., Sun, M., Fablet, R., Tandeo, P., Mason, E., and Chen, G.: EddyNet: A Deep Neural Network For Pixel-Wise Classification of Oceanic Eddies, in: IGARSS 2018–2018 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium, Valencia, Spain, November 2018, 1764–1767, https://doi.org/10.1109/IGARSS.2018.8518411, 2018. a
Maggiori, E., Tarabalka, Y., Charpiat, G., and Alliez, P.: Can Semantic Labeling Methods Generalize to Any City? The Inria Aerial Image Labeling Benchmark, in: IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS), Forth Worth, TX, USA, 23–28 July 2017, 3226–3229, https://doi.org/10.1109/IGARSS.2017.8127684, 2017. a
Nicolas, K. M., Drumetz, L., Lefèvre, S., Tiede, D., Bajjouk, T., and Burnel, J.-C.: Deep Learning–Based Bathymetry Mapping from Multispectral Satellite Data Around Europa Island, in: European Spatial Data for Coastal and Marine Remote Sensing, edited by: Niculescu, S., Chapter 6, Springer, Cham, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-16213-8_6, 2023. a
Oke, P. R., Allen, J. S., Miller, R. N., Egbert, G. D., and Kosro, P. M.: Assimilation of surface velocity data into a primitive equation coastal ocean model, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 107, 5-1–5-25, https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JC000511, 2002. a
Oktay, O., Schlemper, J., Folgoc, L. L., Lee, M., Heinrich, M., Misawa, K., Mori, K., McDonagh, S., Hammerla, N. Y., Kainz, B., Glocker, B., and Rueckert, D.: Attention u-net: Learning where to look for the pancreas, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1804.03999, 11 April 2018. a
Panagiotis, V.: Gulf of Mexico high-resolution (0.01°× 0.01°) bathymetric grid-version 2.0, February 2013, Distributed by: Gulf of Mexico Research Initiative Information and Data Cooperative (GRIIDC), Harte Research Institute, Texas A&M UniversityCorpus Christi, https://doi.org/10.7266/N7X63JZ5, 2014. a
Pech-May, F., Aquino-Santos, R., Álvarez Cárdenas, O., Arandia, J. L., and Rios-Toledo, G.: Segmentation and Visualization of Flooded Areas Through Sentinel-1 Images and U-Net, IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl., 17, 8996–9008, https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTARS.2024.3387452, 2024. a
Ronneberger, O., Fischer, P., and Brox, T.: U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation, in: International Conference on Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention, 234–241, Springer, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24574-4_28, 2015. a, b, c
Roy, A. G., Navab, N., and Wachinger, C.: Concurrent spatial and channel “squeeze & excitation” in fully convolutional networks, in: Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention–MICCAI 2018: 21st International Conference, Granada, Spain, 16–20 September 2018, Proceedings, Part I, 421–429, Springer, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00928-1_48, 2018. a
Rue, H. and Held, L.: Gaussian Markov random fields: theory and applications, Chapman and Hall/CRC, https://doi.org/10.1201/9780203492024, 2005. a
Russwurm, M. and Korner, M.: Multi-temporal land cover classification with sequential recurrent encoders, ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf., 7, 129, 2018. a
Tian, S., Dong, Y., Feng, R., Liang, D., and Wang, L.: Mapping mountain glaciers using an improved U-Net model with cSE, Int. J. Digit. Earth, 15, 463–477, https://doi.org/10.1080/17538947.2022.2036834, 2022. a
Zavala-Romero, O., Bozec, A., Chassignet, E. P., and Miranda, J. R.: CNN-based data assimilation for operational ocean models (Gulf of Mexico case study), Version 1.0, Zenodo [software], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14714803, 2025. a
Short summary
This study shows AI can speed up data assimilation in ocean models. Researchers used convolutional neural networks (CNNs) to assimilate sea surface temperature and height observations in the Gulf of Mexico, learning to replicate corrections made by traditional, computationally expensive methods. CNN design and training window size significantly impacted accuracy, but the percentage of ocean pixels did not. These findings suggest CNNs may accelerate data assimilation in realistic settings.
This study shows AI can speed up data assimilation in ocean models. Researchers used...