Dynamical errors in machine learning forecasts
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
In machine learning forecasting, standard error metrics such as mean absolute error (MAE) and mean squared error (MSE) quantify discrepancies between predictions and target values. However, these metrics do not directly evaluate the physical and/or dynamical consistency of forecasts, an increasingly critical concern in scientific and engineering applications. Indeed, a fundamental yet often overlooked question is whether machine learning forecasts preserve the dynamical behavior of the underlying system. Addressing this issue is essential for assessing the fidelity of machine learning models and identifying potential failure modes, particularly in applications where maintaining correct dynamical behavior is crucial. In this work, we investigate the relationship between standard forecasting error metrics, such as MAE and MSE, and the dynamical properties of the underlying system. To achieve this goal, we use two recently developed dynamical indices: the instantaneous dimension (d), and the inverse persistence (θ). Our results indicate that larger forecast errors -- e.g., higher MSE -- tend to occur in states with higher d (higher complexity) and higher θ (lower persistence). To further assess dynamical consistency, we propose error metrics based on the dynamical indices that measure the discrepancy of the forecasted d and θ versus their correct values. Leveraging these dynamical indices-based metrics, we analyze direct and recursive forecasting strategies for three canonical datasets -- Lorenz, Kuramoto-Sivashinsky equation, and Kolmogorov flow -- as well as a real-world weather forecasting task. Our findings reveal substantial distortions in dynamical properties in ML forecasts, especially for long forecast lead times or long recursive simulations, providing complementary information on ML forecast fidelity that can be used to improve ML models.
Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 6 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Apr 2025.
Builds on
6 of 36 references.
References · 6
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
- 2019Optuna: A Next-generation Hyperparameter Optimization Frameworkcited by 2,501
- 2024ACE2: Accurately learning subseasonal to decadal atmospheric variability and forced responsescited by 54
- 2024ORBIT: Oak Ridge Base Foundation Model for Earth System Predictabilitycited by 17
- 2024Spatio-temporal Dynamical Indices for Complex Systemscited by 3
- 2020Industry-Relevant Implicit Large-Eddy Simulation of a High-Performance Road Car via Spectral/hp Element Methodscited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 3; 2026: 3.
6 papers.
- 2025FourCastNet 3: A geometric approach to probabilistic machine-learning weather forecasting at scalecited by 62
- 2026Hierarchy of extreme-event predictability in turbulence revealed by machine learningcited by 2
- 2025Benchmarking M-LTSF: Frequency and Noise-Based Evaluation of Multivariate Long Time Series Forecasting Modelscited by 1
- 2025Parallel BiLSTM-Transformer networks for forecasting chaotic dynamicscited by 0
- 2026Dynamics-Aware Weighting for Deep Learning Forecasts of Chaotic Systemscited by 0
- 2026Do Neural PDE Solvers Learn the Right Dynamics?cited by 0
- 2026Do Neural PDE Solvers Learn the Right Dynamics?3 Oct 2026
- 2026Dynamics-Aware Weighting for Deep Learning Forecasts of Chaotic Systems23 Aug 2026
- 2026Hierarchy of extreme-event predictability in turbulence revealed by machine learning14 Mar 2026
- 2025Parallel BiLSTM-Transformer networks for forecasting chaotic dynamics27 Oct 2025
- 2025Benchmarking M-LTSF: Frequency and Noise-Based Evaluation of Multivariate Long Time Series Forecasting Models6 Oct 2025
- 2025FourCastNet 3: A geometric approach to probabilistic machine-learning weather forecasting at scale16 Jul 2025