TY - JOUR
T1 - Coevolution of machine learning and process-based modelling to revolutionize Earth and environmental sciences
T2 - A perspective
AU - Razavi, Saman
AU - Hannah, David M.
AU - Elshorbagy, Amin
AU - Kumar, Sujay
AU - Marshall, Lucy
AU - Solomatine, Dimitri P.
AU - Dezfuli, Amin
AU - Sadegh, Mojtaba
AU - Famiglietti, James
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 The Authors. Hydrological Processes published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
PY - 2022/6
Y1 - 2022/6
N2 - Machine learning (ML) applications in Earth and environmental sciences (EES) have gained incredible momentum in recent years. However, these ML applications have largely evolved in ‘isolation’ from the mechanistic, process-based modelling (PBM) paradigms, which have historically been the cornerstone of scientific discovery and policy support. In this perspective, we assert that the cultural barriers between the ML and PBM communities limit the potential of ML, and even its ‘hybridization’ with PBM, for EES applications. Fundamental, but often ignored, differences between ML and PBM are discussed as well as their strengths and weaknesses in light of three overarching modelling objectives in EES, (1) nowcasting and prediction, (2) scenario analysis, and (3) diagnostic learning. The paper ponders over a ‘coevolutionary’ approach to model building, shifting away from a borrowing to a co-creation culture, to develop a generation of models that leverage the unique strengths of ML such as scalability to big data and high-dimensional mapping, while remaining faithful to process-based knowledge base and principles of model explainability and interpretability, and therefore, falsifiability.
AB - Machine learning (ML) applications in Earth and environmental sciences (EES) have gained incredible momentum in recent years. However, these ML applications have largely evolved in ‘isolation’ from the mechanistic, process-based modelling (PBM) paradigms, which have historically been the cornerstone of scientific discovery and policy support. In this perspective, we assert that the cultural barriers between the ML and PBM communities limit the potential of ML, and even its ‘hybridization’ with PBM, for EES applications. Fundamental, but often ignored, differences between ML and PBM are discussed as well as their strengths and weaknesses in light of three overarching modelling objectives in EES, (1) nowcasting and prediction, (2) scenario analysis, and (3) diagnostic learning. The paper ponders over a ‘coevolutionary’ approach to model building, shifting away from a borrowing to a co-creation culture, to develop a generation of models that leverage the unique strengths of ML such as scalability to big data and high-dimensional mapping, while remaining faithful to process-based knowledge base and principles of model explainability and interpretability, and therefore, falsifiability.
KW - artificial intelligence
KW - deep learning
KW - machine learning
KW - modelling objective
KW - policy support
KW - predication
KW - process-based modelling
KW - scenarios
KW - scientific discovery
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85133015520&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/hyp.14596
DO - 10.1002/hyp.14596
M3 - Comment/debate
AN - SCOPUS:85133015520
SN - 0885-6087
VL - 36
JO - Hydrological Processes
JF - Hydrological Processes
IS - 6
M1 - e14596
ER -