Taking a Second Look: Correcting Sea Ice Forecasts with Sparse Observations

Seasonal climate predictions support planning and risk management by offering early information of the most likely-to-occur climate conditions in the coming months, and associated uncertainties. Ensemble forecasts enable this by simulating many plausible outcomes, allowing predictions to be expressed as usable probabilities. Large ensembles and high-resolution forecasts strengthen this guidance by better sampling uncertainty and capturing finer-scale processes but come with significant computational cost. Moreover, forecast ensembles drift and exhibit systematic biases and spatio-temporal errors that grow with lead time, requiring careful post-processing and calibration. A probabilistic post-processing framework based on conditional Variational Autoencoders (cVAEs) was developed at the Canadian Center for Climate Modeling and Analysis to generate large ensembles of bias adjusted seasonal predictions of Arctic sea ice. The generative model was designed to learn the observational distribution conditioned on the biased model prediction. This enables generation of arbitrarily large ensembles of well-calibrated, bias corrected forecasts with improved skill. Here, we extend this framework to address the loss of fine-scale energy and the characteristic blurriness in predictions, a known limitation of standard cVAEs. Specifically, we employ a generator in place of the Gaussian parametrized decoder in the cVAE and use Continuous Ranked Probability Score in the objective function instead of the Mean Square Error. We further use a higher resolution target dataset compared to the raw forecast. We show that the adjusted forecasts are better calibrated, more consistent with the observational distribution, and exhibit smaller errors than benchmark predictions, while also enhancing the resolution of the raw forecasts and improving sharpness and spectral power relative to the standard cVAE.

Sea-ice stage of development (SoD) describes the age and associated thickness of sea ice and provides important information for navigation, and operational ice monitoring. SoD labels are obtained from operational ice charts, where trained analysts interpret satellite observations and assign standardized stage codes to regions with similar ice conditions. These codes often represent ranges of compatible ice thicknesses rather than exact physical values. Deep-learning methods can automate SoD mapping and commonly adopt operational ice charts as reference labels for training. These annotations are not exact, however; this is because chart interpretation relies on analyst judgement and on the observations available at the time, so different ice services may assign different SoD labels to the same conditions. We term this variation across independently produced expert annotations multi-annotator label uncertainty; collapsing the annotations into a single deterministic target discards this variation. A second source of uncertainty originates in the learned model itself. In this paper, we quantify both sources: annotation uncertainty from disagreement among independent ice-service charts and model uncertainty from the learned predictive models. We then evaluate their relationship by testing whether model uncertainty is higher where ice services disagree. We observe that supervision incorporating information from multiple annotators can improve this correspondence, with soft supervision achieving the highest overall correlation of 0.256. The relationship becomes substantially stronger near the ice edge, where model predictive uncertainty closely tracks multi-annotator disagreement, reaching a correlation of 0.704 within 0--10 km. Among the uncertainty-estimation approaches, Monte Carlo dropout provides the best-calibrated confidence estimates, with an expected calibration error of 0.050.

Time-series foundation models can forecast across heterogeneous domains without task-specific training, but their forecasts are fixed once produced and cannot directly incorporate task-specific expert feedback. We study expert-guided forecast editing: a frozen foundation model generates candidate future trajectories, and an expensive expert evaluator scores them to guide forecast revision. Under a tight query budget, two natural strategies sit at opposite ends: best-of-$N$ purely exploits the foundation model's predictive distribution, while optimization approaches mostly explore the forecast horizon as an unstructured high-dimensional vector. Each extreme is individually sub-optimal. We introduce \textbf{DEFT}, an expert-guided forecast editing framework that balances the two by first exploiting the foundation model's predictive samples in a decomposed trend--seasonal space, then exploring around them via component-wise refinement. DEFT queries the expert only on complete trajectories, then reuses scores for the trend and seasonal components that appeared in the queried recombinations. This lets each expert query provide structured component-level feedback while keeping the foundation model frozen. We compare DEFT against direct search approaches, including best-of-$N$, cross-entropy methods, and Bayesian optimization, under matched expert-query budgets. Across two forecasting benchmarks consisting of 78 datasets, three time-series foundation models, four feedback types, and seven query budgets, DEFT consistently improves the effectiveness of expert guidance. A molecular-dynamics case study further suggests that the same principle extends to more physically grounded feedback, supporting the hypothesis that sparse test-time guidance should be spent balancing prior exploitation with structured exploration.