跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.03543 · v1

Can LLM Agents Improve Imperfect Earth System Model Parameterizations?

首次提交 2026-11-03 02:05
版本更新 2026-11-03 02:05
雷达观测 2026-11-04 23:41
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Earth system models (ESMs) rely on parameterizations to represent unresolved processes such as convection, cloud microphysics, and turbulence. However, translating advances in physical understanding into stable, validated parameterizations and integrating them into ESMs often takes years. Agentic AI could accelerate this process and enable more systematic exploration of design choices. Using warm-rain collision-coalescence as a test case, we evaluate agents' ability to synthesize scientific literature, reimplement published bulk parameterizations, and propose new functional forms as differentiable JAX code. We compare conventional parameterizations, data-driven emulators, and agent-generated closures against high-fidelity superdroplet simulations, repeating unattended experiments across ten language models. With expert guidance or iterative feedback, agents produced executable, differentiable, mass-conserving code, although unattended performance depended strongly on the scheme and language model. Iterative feedback lowered median rollout error for eight of ten models. Retuned physical schemes matched or outperformed many learned parameterizations at substantially lower computational cost, but two of 100 unattended agent-generated closures achieved slightly lower rain-mass error than the most accurate retuned scheme on held-out simulations.

作者备注:Sim2Sci Workshop, NeurIPS 2026

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-03 02:05 · 最新观测版本

Can LLM Agents Improve Imperfect Earth System Model Parameterizations?

Earth system models (ESMs) rely on parameterizations to represent unresolved processes such as convection, cloud microphysics, and turbulence. However, translating advances in physical understanding into stable, validated parameterizations and integrating them into ESMs often takes years. Agentic AI could accelerate this process and enable more systematic exploration of design choices. Using warm-rain collision-coalescence as a test case, we evaluate agents' ability to synthesize scientific literature, reimplement published bulk parameterizations, and propose new functional forms as differentiable JAX code. We compare conventional parameterizations, data-driven emulators, and agent-generated closures against high-fidelity superdroplet simulations, repeating unattended experiments across ten language models. With expert guidance or iterative feedback, agents produced executable, differentiable, mass-conserving code, although unattended performance depended strongly on the scheme and language model. Iterative feedback lowered median rollout error for eight of ten models. Retuned physical schemes matched or outperformed many learned parameterizations at substantially lower computational cost, but two of 100 unattended agent-generated closures achieved slightly lower rain-mass error than the most accurate retuned scheme on held-out simulations.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗