the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
A continual learning-based multilayer perceptron for improved reconstruction of three-dimensional nitrate concentration
Abstract. Nitrate plays a crucial role in marine ecosystems, as it influences primary productivity. Despite its ecological significance, accurately mapping its three-dimensional (3D) concentration on a large scale remains a considerable challenge due to the inherent limitations of existing methodologies. To address this issue, this study proposes a continual learning-based multilayer perceptron (MLP) model to reconstruct the 3D ocean nitrate concentrations above 2000 m depth over the pan-European coast. The continual learning strategy enhances the model generalization by integrating knowledge from CMEMS nitrate data, effectively overcoming the spatial limitations of BGC-Argo observations in comprehensive nitrate characterization. The proposed approach integrates the advantages of extensive spatial remote sensing observations, the precision of Biogeochemical Argo (BGC-Argo) measurements, and the broad knowledge from simulated nitrate datasets, exploiting the capacity of neural networks to model their nonlinear relationships between multi-source sea surface environmental variables and subsurface nitrates. The model achieves excellent performance in profile cross-validation (R2 = 0.98, RMSE=0.522 µmol · kg−1), and maintains robustness across diverse 3D validation scenarios, suggesting its effectiveness in filling observational gaps and reconstructing the 3D nitrate field. Then, the spatiotemporal distribution of the reconstructed 3D nitrate field from 2010 to 2023 reveals a spatial distribution pattern, an interannual upward trend, and the degree of consistency in vertical variation. The contributions of all 22 input features to the model's estimation were respectively quantified by using Shapley additive explanations values. This study reveals the potential of the proposed approach to overcoming observational limitations and enrich further insights into the 3D ocean condition. The reconstructed 3D nitrate dataset is freely available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14010813 (Yu et al., 2024).
- Preprint
(40165 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 13 Jan 2025)
-
RC1: 'Comment on essd-2024-508', Anonymous Referee #1, 09 Dec 2024
reply
The manuscript presents a multi-layered perceptron (MLP) model designed for continuous learning to enhance the three-dimensional reconstruction of nitrate concentrations in oceanic environments. This approach improves the model's generalization capabilities by incorporating the nonlinear relationships among various marine surface environmental variables and surface nitrate levels. The model has been successfully applied in the Mediterranean Sea and Northeast Atlantic. Additionally, the study provides a reconstructed nitrate dataset spanning from 2010 to 2023, which holds significant value for marine ecology and environmental research. Below are my comments and suggestions regarding the manuscript:
- The methodology for cross-validation should be elaborated upon. The current description does not adequately clarify how cross-validation is conducted, nor does it explain the rationale for utilizing all Argo data in the validation process.
- The rationale for the inclusion of numerous variables needs to be articulated. A robust artificial intelligence model should be grounded in physical principles; achieving favorable results without this foundation may hinder the accurate representation of dynamic processes. It is essential to conduct experiments to determine whether the exclusion of certain variables could enhance the simulation outcomes. Furthermore, the absence of consideration for influential factors such as precipitation and river runoff warrants explanation.
- The role of upper ocean phytoplankton should be critically evaluated, as they are significant sinks for nitrate. The analysis suggests that phytoplankton are not influential, which raises concerns regarding the validity of this finding. It is imperative to provide a detailed explanation of the model's capacity to capture the underlying physical and biological processes in the ocean. Is it possible that the inclusion of numerous other variables has overshadowed the impact of chlorophyll a (Chla)?
- A more comprehensive discussion of the model's limitations is necessary, particularly regarding the consistency and discrepancies between the model's results and existing literature, including its performance in data-sparse regions.
Minor Comments:
Line 5: Provide the full name for “CMEMS”.
Line 36: Provide the full name for “SSN”
Line 45: Several studies, for example, Liu et al. (2022, http://doi.org/10.3390/rs14195021) have considered other factors besides SST.
Line 81-82: Need more explanation.
Line 94: “Pan-European” or “pan-European”? should be identical.
Line 95: Please check the definition of “shelf sea”. Apparently, the study area is beyond the shelf sea.
Section 2.2: There is no introduction to the CMEMS simulated nitrate data, which should be introduced detailedly.
Figure 3: It looks familiar to me, and although the author may have redrawn it from a certain document, the original source should be noted.
Line 274: “. the” should be “. The”.
“Figure” or “Fig. ” should be identical throughout the text.
Line 317-318: More introductions need to explain why and how.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-508-RC1
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
127 | 38 | 6 | 171 | 2 | 1 |
- HTML: 127
- PDF: 38
- XML: 6
- Total: 171
- BibTeX: 2
- EndNote: 1
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1