Beyond the record: evaluating probabilistic AI weather forecasts deep in the tail

Abstract

Can probabilistic artificial intelligence (AI) weather forecasts retain skill beyond their training domain? We compare four state-of-the-art AI models (ArchesWeatherGen, U-Cast, WeatherNext2 and GenCast-mini) with the physics-based IFS-ENS over land in 2022, at 1.5{\deg} resolution and lead times of 2--10 days. Monthly ERA5 records from 1979--2021 define common historical boundaries, and we characterize new records set in 2022 by their depth, i.e., the exceedance margin relative to local historical variability. Two proper scores, record-threshold weighted CRPS and Brier score, assess the magnitude and probability of record exceedances across all eligible cases, retaining both missed extremes and false alarms. Verified against ERA5, AI models outperform IFS-ENS for heat and cold records at almost every lead and depth. For heat, the advantage strengthens with depth, partly because IFS-ENS over-forecasts deep records, and largely persists for deeper records under HRES-fc0 verification. For wind, gains erode for deeper records and longer leads. Better tail scores can nevertheless coexist with aggregate probability deficits or surpluses, and some improvements arise chiefly on non-exceedances. Increasing underprediction on progressively more extreme observed subsets can also arise through outcome selection, even for an ideal conditional-mean forecast. These findings establish 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. They caution against generalizing the extrapolation failure reported for deterministic AI forecasts to probabilistic systems, and motivate common verification conventions that separate comparative tail skill, performance on realized extremes, and probabilistic calibration.