An extensive benchmark of tropical cyclone forecasting is conducted, comparing GenCast, FourCastNet 3, and FGN with ECMWF's operational physics-based ensemble, IFS-ENS, finding that leading AI models substantially outperform IFS-ENS in cyclone tracking.
Abstract
Weather prediction is undergoing an important shift, with data-driven AI models outperforming leading numerical weather prediction systems on average at a fraction of the computational cost. Yet, whether this success extends to extreme events remains contested. Earlier evaluations have exposed important shortcomings, but have largely focused on deterministic models and metrics, leaving the capabilities of the latest probabilistic models less understood. We conduct an extensive benchmark of tropical cyclone forecasting, comparing GenCast, FourCastNet 3, and FGN with ECMWF's operational physics-based ensemble, IFS-ENS. We develop a suite of probabilistic metrics and diagnostic analyses to assess cyclone tracking, intensity biases, uncertainty, and the wind-pressure relationship that characterizes storm structure. We find that, despite remaining limitations in intensity and ensemble spread, leading AI models substantially outperform IFS-ENS in cyclone tracking: FGN achieves better probabilistic location scores for 90% of evaluated storms in 2025. Further analyses reveal model-specific failure modes and suggest a lingering influence of pretraining data, pointing to opportunities for targeted improvement. Nonetheless, these results suggest that AI models are capable of capturing physical relationships that remain predictive well beyond typical weather conditions, motivating further investigation into how these capabilities emerge and how to strengthen them.
AI weather prediction (AIWP) models have emerged as a key complement to physics-based numerical weather prediction (NWP) models, and now often outperform them on aggregate skill. Yet, several studies report that physics-based models still forecast extreme events better, in particular record-breaking extremes, based on...
J. Wessel, F. Spuler, Christopher A. T. Ferro et al.· 0 citations
A true‐state constraint (TSC) method that can diagnose error propagation by adjusting forecasts in an upstream region toward reanalysis data and tracking the responses elsewhere, and a climatology constraint method that, when combined with the TSC method, can quantify the remote impacts of evolving atmospheric circulat...
Yan-Bo Nie, A. Sengupta, J. Baño-Medina et al.· Geophysical Research Letters· 1 citation
It is established that native probabilistic AI ensembles retain, and for heat increase, their advantage over IFS-ENS as thresholds move beyond local records, although all advantages narrow with lead time.
Bas van Velthoven, Cas Decancq, Diego G. Miralles et al.· 0 citations
A calibrated comparison of GraphCast, GenCast and the Functional Generative Network against the physical NWP model IFS for rainfall prediction across Africa highlights the potential of calibrated AI weather prediction to provide accessible and computationally efficient rainfall forecasts, while demonstrating the contin...
S. Nath, Docko Sow, Koomi Toussaint Amoussouvi et al.· 0 citations
It is found that model rankings are highly sensitive to the choice of evaluation metrics: the considered physics-based model tends to perform best when evaluation is restricted to observed extreme events, whereas AI models generally perform better when evaluated using weighted scoring functions.
Tobias Biegert, Sam Allen, Zhong-Wei Zhang et al.· 0 citations
CLARA (Calibrated Advection-Routing Attention) learns joint Gaussian predictive distributions of five surface variables from station observations alone, without numerical weather prediction or reanalysis, and outperforms persistence in all 60 multi-year region-lead comparisons and a similarly sized learned model in 57...