Articles Crop Loss Extreme Weather GSM Volcanic & Seismic Activity 

New Paper uses AI to Predict the Sunspot Cycles: Low Solar Activity until 2050

SCIENTIST USE AI TO PREDICT SUNSPOT CYCLES: For the first time, scientists have used artificial intelligence not only to predict sunspots but also to correct the incomplete record of past sunspot activity.

A new paper just published in Advances in Space Research by Dr Victor Velasco Herrera, a theoretical physicist at the National Autonomous University of Mexico, Dr Willie Soon, an award-winning solar astrophysicist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, and Professor David Legates, a climatologist at the University of Delaware and former director of the U.S. Global Change Research Program, predicts that the new 11-year solar cycle that has recently begun will show near-record low sunspot activity that will last until mid-century.

Sunspots matter.

When there are many sunspots and the Sun is active, there is a danger that a strong solar ejection directed towards the Earth could damage or even destroy the thousands of satellites on which the world depends for everything from radio, telephone, television and internet communications to monitoring the climate and observing the farthest reaches of the universe.

Worse, a really strong solar storm could damage the largely unshielded terrestrial electricity grid. Most power lines and transformers are above ground and thus acutely vulnerable. Solar panels, too, could have their lives shortened by intense solar radiation.

The three scientists taught a machine-learning algorithm how to recognize underlying patterns and cycles in the past 320 years’ sunspot record. The algorithm then discovered a hitherto-unnoticed interaction between the 5.5-year solar half-cycles (blue) and the 120-year Gleissberg double cycles (red dotted lines) which allowed it to confirm the earlier predictions of a quiet half-century to come – predictions which are now shared by solar physicists.

That interaction between the two periodicities led the algorithm to indicate that from the 1730s to the 1760s, early in the modern sunspot record (the gray band below), sunspots appear to have been under-recorded: as the 120-year cycle approached its maximum amplitude, sunspots should have been more numerous than reported at the time.

Periods of minimum and maximum solar activity from 1700 to 2020 analyzed by machine learning.


The algorithm then predicted the sunspots from 2021 to 2100. It suggests that the current low solar activity is likely to continue until 2050:

The Sun may be quiet for half a century.


Dr Velasco Herrera said: “Not everyone agrees with our expectation that solar activity will continue to be low for another three solar cycles. A paper in Solar Physics by Dr Scott McIntosh of the U.S. National Center for Atmospheric Research, says the coming solar cycle will be unusually active, with a peak sunspot number of 233, compared with our estimate of less than 100. Place your bets in the Battle of the Solar Cycles!”

Dr Soon said, “The machine-learning algorithm, with its interesting interplay between the very short 5.5-year cycle and the long 120-year cycle, confirms our results of 10-15 years ago suggesting that the next three or four solar cycles will be comparatively inactive. This is the first time that the twin problems of hindcasting incomplete past records and forecasting the future have been combined in a single analysis.”

Dr Legates said: “President Trump realized the importance of space weather, and particularly of the Sun, in influencing global climate. It was he who signed the October 2020 ProSwift Act into law to assist in studying and forecasting space weather. Given the history of previous periods of comparative solar activity, the weather may get a little cooler between now and 2050. If we are right, our electricity grids and our satellites should be safe until then.”

You can download the new paper HERE.

The Sun painted by a machine-learning algorithm in the style of Van Gogh’s Starry Night


Social Media channels are restricting Electroverse’s reach: Twitter are purging followers while Facebook are labeling posts as “false” and have slapped-on crippling page restrictions.

So, be sure to subscribe to receive new post notifications by email (the box is located in the sidebar >>> or scroll down if on mobile).

And/or become a Patron, by clicking here: patreon.com/join/electroverse.

The site receives ZERO funding, and never has. So any way you can, help us spread the message so others can survive and thrive in the coming times.

Grand Solar Minimum + Pole Shift

Related posts

29 Thoughts to “New Paper uses AI to Predict the Sunspot Cycles: Low Solar Activity until 2050”

  1. Addelad

    “The weather may get a little cooler” – is that consistent with previous GSM’s, or is the author indulging in understatement?

  2. Well.. Surprise-surprise! The authors of the current paper repeated our results reported 6 years ago – we have a grand solar minimum in 2020-2053!

    But they forgotten to put the reference to our paper and pretend that they found it absolutely on their own!! Shame!!

    Zharkova et al, 2015, Nature Scientific Reportshttps://www.nature.com/articles/srep15689

    1. Cap Allon

      Dr Zharkova,

      If you have an editorial, an essay, or even just an opinion you’d like to “vent,” I’d be happy to post it on Electroverse (supposing it is relevant to low solar activity/global cooling, of course). Please email [email protected] if interested. I appreciate your work.

      Cap

      1. Habibullo Abdussamatov

        In connection with the predictions of some scientists about low solar activity in 2020-2053, I would like to clarify who actually was the first to scientifically predict it. But especially Prof. Valentina Zharkova and other always forgotten to put the reference to my papers 2003-2007 years about the beginning of a period of low solar activity from 1990 until the end of the 21st century, as the phase of the decline and minimum of the quasi-bicentennial cycle of the Sun, and now they pretend that found it absolutely on their own ! !
        Really, Shame ! !
        Some of my articles:
        Kinematics and Physics of Celestial Bodies: 2005, 21, pp. 328-332; 2007, 23, pp. 97-100.
        Izvestiya Krym. Astrof. Observ. 2007, 103 (4), p.292-298 (in Russian).
        Thermal Science, 2015, 19 (Suppl. 2), pp. S279-S288.
        The new Little Ice Age has started. Evidence-Based Climate Science. Easterbrook D. J. (ed) Oxford: Elsevier, 2016. pp. 307-328.

        1. Cap Allon

          Abdussamatov, your research was among was the first that brought ‘low solar activity’ to my attention.

          If you have any editorials/essays (other than the studies you kindly referenced above) that are pertinent to our near-term future (ideally with a reduced solar activity/cooling perspective), then please email them to [email protected]; I would love to feature them on Electroverse.

          This website is, largely, an altruistic effort — it exists to warn others of the severe cooling that may be just on the horizon.

          Best,
          Cap

          1. Habibullo Abdussamatov

            The variations of TSI (≥ 0.3%) in quasi-bicentennial cycle, insignificant by the standards of a star, is capable of drastically changing the Earth’s climate. The dominant factor in the climate change is bicentennial variations in the TSI. The only and most reliable way to predict the amplitude and the exact time of future changes in climate is to study long-term variations in the Earth’s energy imbalance (EEI) – difference between the amounts of TSI coming to the external atmospheric layers and the total energy outgoing back to space. That is, it is determined by the equation for the incoming and outgoing solar radiation at the outer layers of the atmosphere, the temperature of the surface, atmosphere, and the Earth’s own radiation, as well as the concentration of water vapor in the first place and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. The variation of the EEI, regardless of its causes, over a period of about 30 years or more is the main measure of subsequent climate change and global temperature. In so doing the average annual energy of the Earth’s own thermal radiation into space, due to the thermal inertia of the Ocean, always the time lags 30±10 years from the energy of absorbed solar radiation. Since ~1990, the Earth radiates more energy back into space than, it became absorbs. As a result, a long-term deficit of the Earth’s energy balance leads to cool down. Then the subsequent multiple influences of secondary causal chain feedback effects leads to an additional decrease in temperature up to few times in comparison with the direct impact of the TSI. Long before the cycle 24 began, I predicted back in 2003-2007, what we are seeing now in the solar cycles 24-25 and the quasi-bicentennial cycle. Therefore, the warming of the twentieth century is not the result of human activity, but the result of natural a quasi-bicentennial cycles of TSI, which, for at least 8,000 years, caused the corresponding quasi-periods of warming and deep cooling (1.5-2°C) and also variations in the concentration in the first place of H2O and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. The Sun entered a prolonged cooling period. We will are experiencing a period of unusually weak solar cycles in 21st century. The last time a prolonged solar minimum was in effect was the Maunder minimum.
            However, in so doing cyclical variations in solar activity are the accompanying phenomena of physical processes occurring in the interior of the Sun and do not substantially affect neither the TSI nor the climate. Therefore, we have developing the special space project Lunar Observatory for monitoring the Earth’s energy imbalance and climate.

            My some editorials/essays that are pertinent to our near-term future (ideally with a reduced TSI/cooling perspective), to warn others of the severe cooling that on the horizon:
            Abdussamatov H.I., 2003. Long-term correlated variations of the solar activity, radius, irradiance and climate. In: Proc. Int. Conf. on Climatic and Ecological Aspects of the Solar Activity, St. Petersburg, pp. 3-10 (in Russian).
            Abdussamatov H.I. 2004. About the long-term coordinated variations of the activity, radius, total irradiance of the Sun and the Earth’s climate. In: Proceedings of IAU Symposium No 223 Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, pp. 541-542.
            Abdussamatov H.I. 2009. The Sun defines the climate. Russian Journal ‘Nauka i Zhizn’ (‘Science and Life’) 34-42. http://www.gao.spb.ru/english/astrometr/abduss_nkj_2009.pdf.
            Abdussamatov H.I. 2009. The Sun Dictates the Climate of the Earth. Published by Logos, St Petersburg, 197 pp. (in Russian).
            Abdussamatov H.I. 2010. The Sun dictates the climate. In: Fourth International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC-4), ppt-presentation, Chicago.
            Abdussamatov H.I. 2012. Bicentennial decrease of the solar constant leads to the Earth’s unbalanced heat budget and deep climate cooling. Kinematics and Physics of Celestial Bodies 28, 62-68.
            Abdussamatov H.I. 2012. Bicentennial decrease of the total solar irradiance leads to unbalanced thermal budget of the Earth and the Little Ice Age. Applied Physics Research 4, 178-184.
            Abdussamatov H.I. 2013a. Grand Minimum of the Total Solar Irradiance Leads to the Little Ice Age. Printed by Nestor-Istoriya, St. Petersburg, 246 pp. (in Russian).
            Abdussamatov H.I. November 25, 2013b. Grand Minimum of the Total Solar Irradiance Leads to the Little Ice Age (Summary for Policy Makers). Science & Public Policy Institute (SPPI), pp. 1-7 (in English).
            Abdussamatov H.I. 2014 – the beginning of the new Little Ice Age. In: Ninth International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC-9), ppt-presentation, Las Vegas.

          2. Cap Allon

            Thank you so much for this.

            Please give me some time to digest/re-digest all of these papers.

            Best,
            Cap

          3. Habibullo Abdussamatov

            “Some pessimistic long-term prospects even expect another Maunder minimum around the year 2040±10” such the reference to my article: Abdussamatov H.I. Kinematics and Phys. Celest. Bodies: 2005, 21, pp. 328-332, was published in paper “Astrophysics in 2006” in the prestigious “Space Science Reviews”, 2007, vol, 132, Issue 1, pp 1-182; doi: 10.1007/s11214-007-9224-0 (In section 2.9.3. Solar Activity Cycle (p. 26) by the authors Trimble V, Aschwanden M.J., Hansen C.J.

    2. P Cermak

      Amazing foresight by Dr. Zharkova and team

      1. Petrichor

        What’s impressive is that (as she says in the Youtube video) she and her grad student did this without funding and in their scarce “spare time”. I wish she could be given a paid sabbatical to do more work on this momentous topic. I would suggest crowdfunding this, but don’t know how. (The internet might not let us, as her research contradicts the pc, mainstream “Global warming” narrative. As a simple citizen with no physics background, I would like to personally thank Dr Zharkova as her presentation made me decide to buy a wood-burner to heat & cook on, in my all-electric house if/when the grid fails due to war or a serious CME. I inherited old-fashioned cast iron dutch oven, pots, pans, perfect for cooking on wood stove or over open fire. I believe in 19th century technology for the future.

    3. Hi Valentina Z – I like your work. Willie Soon is a good friend of mine.

      I published my prediction of global cooling in 2002 to start circa 2020 and unfortunately it is looking quite accurate. Some details here:

      CLIMATE CHANGE, COVID-19, AND THE GREAT RESET
      March 21, 2021, Updated April 22, 2021
      A Climate and Energy Primer for Politicians and Media
      https://thsresearch.wordpress.com/2021/04/25/climate-change-covid-19-and-the-great-reset/

      1. Hi again Dr Valentina Z. Here is an update on my recent paper. If I do another update, I should include your work and that of Herrera et al. A cooling future is a dangerous future.
        CLIMATE CHANGE, COVID-19, AND THE GREAT RESET Update 1d
        A Climate and Energy Primer for Politicians and Media by Allan M.R. MacRae, B.A.Sc., M.Eng., March 21, 2021, Updated April 27, 2021
        https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com/2021/04/climate-change-covid-19-and-the-great-reset-update-1d-readonly.docx

        In 2008 I discovered a close relationship between atmospheric temperature and atmospheric dCO2/dt, which led to the conclusion that atmospheric CO2 changes lag temperature changes by ~9 months in the modern data record, and thus atmospheric CO2 changes lag temperature changes at all measured time scales (in modern data records and in ice core records, with different delays for different cycle periods).

        In 2013, Humlum et al published similar results to mine and did not cite my 2008 paper. Frankly, I was more relieved than upset. My 2008 conclusion had been vilified and/or ignored by both sides of the mainstream climate science debate for five years. I have since been in friendly contact with Humlum et al and they have been helpful in my recent work.

        Later my good friend Richard S Courtney wrote me that Kuo et al (1990) and Keeling (1995) made similar observations in the journal Nature, but have been studiously ignored by global warming propagandists.
        Kuo and Keeling observed the lag, but not the dCO2/dt vs temperature relationship.
        https://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/esrl-co2/from:1979/mean:12/derivative/plot/uah6/from:1979/scale:0.18/offset:0.17

        My 2008 paper has recently been cited by Dr Ed Berry in his 2020 book and related paper, which is at the cutting edge of climate science.
        “CLIMATE MIRACLE: THERE IS NO CLIMATE CRISIS – NATURE CONTROLS CLIMATE”
        https://www.amazon.ca/Climate-Miracle-climate-crisis-controls-ebook/dp/B08LCD1YC3/
        “CARBON CYCLE MODEL SHOWS NATURE CONTROLS CO2 LEVEL”
        https://edberry.com/blog/climate/climate-physics/preprint3/

        All warmists and most skeptics argue about the magnitude of climate sensitivity to increasing CO2, and whether the resulting CO2-driven global warming will be hot and dangerous or warm and beneficial. Both groups are probably wrong, because global cooling is happening now.

        There is a high probability that both sides of the mainstream climate debate were completely wrong – a waste of more than a decade of vital time, tens of trillions of dollars of green energy nonsense and millions of innocent lives.

        As I often write: “Bundle up! It’s getting colder out there.”

        Best regards, Allan MacRae in Calgary

        1. Hi Dr Valentina,
          My latest update – you are included – thank you!

          CLIMATE CHANGE, COVID-19, AND THE GREAT RESET
          A Climate, Energy and Covid Primer for Politicians and Media
          By Allan M.R. MacRae, Published May 8, 2021 UPDATE 1e
          Download the WORD file
          https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com/2021/05/climate-change-covid-19-and-the-great-reset-update-1e-readonly.docx

    4. Hello Dr. Valentina. I hope you’re well and Happy . I agree your principal components analysis study does point to the reconstruction of the solar activity with accurate hind and forecast manners. These findings are also consistent with Dr. John Casey’s findings with regards to the declining solar activity between 2018-2030 and then from 2030 till 2050. The mathematics of the two methods used ( your study) and theirs may help explain the difference if any, noting that your principal components analysis is regression based analysis, so any interactions between the analysed vectors are already taken care especially you have some added “Sine/Cosine” transformation to the vectors before the PCA was applied, as far as i remember, so if both methods employed ( PCA Vs AI) accounted for the underlying physical rules and mathematical theoretical sense i think they should yield similar conclusions . It is worth digging more in-depth however in the math of the AI network they’ve used, a lots of information to ask and note down before conclusions can be made about how valid and accurate their predictions . AI tends to do a lots of background transformation and depends on the rules they’ve fed the machine with .
      best wishes to all .
      Mohamed

    5. Maksim.

      During low solar activity, the most powerful superflares can occur, I am waiting for them, so to speak , the apocalypse, which will lead to the destruction of all infrastructure on Earth, as well as the change of the Earth’s poles. Could these events happen between 2030 and 2060, or sooner.

  3. John Doran

    This is consistent with what Dr. Valentina Zharkova is predicting.
    When I saw AI, I almost didn’t bother to read this. Then I saw the names Soon & Legates & I knew it would be a good read.
    Thanks,
    JD.

  4. Don Ready

    I was thinking, funny they didn’t mention Zharkova et al, and there was her comment below. Since Z et al published in Nature, it seems impossible that the new group could not have known this.

    1. Cliff Dunlop

      I think Soon was part of the conference that Zharkova reported on her findings. I, too, was struck by the similarity of the graphs to the work Zharkova reported.

  5. Don Ready

    And, Cap, you should be proud that Valentina is reading your stuff. Well done!

  6. Bingo!!! So glad Dr. Zharkova weighed in. One thing the article did not discuss is the variables they used to come up with this “new” finding. “Big Data,” “artificial intelligence” are not magical techniques – they are dependent on the variables included, and distinct from other statistical techniques in the ability to find strong correlations in insanely large data sets. Curious if they included the electromagnetic data that Dr. Zharkova discovered to be the critical factor. Busted!!!

  7. tom0mason

    Well shiver me CO2, looks like the IPCC becomes redundant soon (by-or-before 2030). And that will save all nations a heap of money. Money better spent on protecting the citizens of each nation and not some crooked international circus of corrupt idiots..

    The message to Gates, Mann et al. is that a cold climate takes no prisoners … it just kills

    1. tom0mason

      Also see Cooper et al., 2021 (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349448597_A_global_environmental_crisis_42000_years_ago )
      and Supplemental Data
      (https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/suppl/2021/02/17/371.6531.811.DC1/abb8677_Cooper_SM.pdf )
      Some key quotes from the paper and supplemental materials …

      “geomagnetic field minima ~42 ka, in combination with Grand Solar Minima, caused substantial changes in atmospheric ozone concentration and circulation, driving synchronous global climate shifts that caused major environmental changes, extinction events, and transformations in the archaeological record”

      “geomagnetic excursions can alter latitudinal temperature gradients through drastic increases in cosmic radiation and decreased ozone concentrations”

      “a warm period from 54 to 42 ka within the last glaciation [with] annual temperatures within 1°C to 1.5°C of those today”

  8. Shawn Brunel

    A new little ice age could be on the horizon in our lifetime.

  9. Petrichor

    If Dr. Zharkova lives long enough, she will get the Nobel Prize for physics. The Q & A period after her presentation is as eye-opening as the lecture.
    Meanwhile, I advise everyone who viewed this to insulate your house & install a wood-burner stove in it; then build a *fortified* greenhouse to grow your vegetables. In such a green house, you can also raise micro-livestock (improved Cavies, from U. of Peru) for protein; no need for Bill Gates’s manufactured “Solent Green” synthetic meat. . .

  10. Victor Manuel Naumovich Velasco Herrera

    Dear Valentina Zharkova,

    I appreciate your communication. But above all the discussion and scientific debate must be respectful.

    As fellow scientists, we must be very careful when we claim to be the first to report a scientific result.

    There are two things that I agree with you:

    1) We are currently in a secular solar minimum.

    2) You omitted to cite my works, which was published since 2008,
    and yet I have been respectful of this omission.

    First, we noticed that in

    https://electroverse.net/new-paper-uses-ai-to-predict-the-sunspot-cycles-low-solar-activity-until-2050/

    a key sentence was accidentally removed from the file we sent to everyone:

    Both Dr Soon (in 2004) and Dr Velasco Herrera (in 2008) had previously published papers speculating that
    the first half of the 21st century would be a period of unusually few sunspots,
    potentially slowing the rate of global warming.

    In case you need confirmation, please see the full text here:

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/04/23/scientists-use-ai-to-predict-sunspot-cycles/

    Unfortunately, if one follows your apparent public “demand” for a citation of your papers, then I wonder
    if you care to discuss works by Theodore Landscheidt, Ivanka Charvatova, Habibullo Abdussamatov,
    K. Hiremath, Don Easterbrook, the late Nils-Axel Morner in your own works never mind some of our works
    that you have neglected.

    But more specifically, you failed to understand that getting the rough answer
    right for the wrong reasons is not a good thing for science. You have no specific predictions for
    sunspot numbers for Cycle 24 or 25 (we say this despite Figure 2 in your 2015 paper which
    we clearly urge that anyone interested in this debate to read) let alone those further out in time
    (again we note Figure 3 in your 2015 paper did not constitute any predictions of sunspot number)?
    There is still a long gap between your theoretical dynamo waves (a subject we are familiar
    with as well; in this sense we would encourage you to study works/papers by Scott McIntosh and Bob Leamon)
    to sunspot numbers or group sunspot number counts?
    This is why we have been extremely careful to distinguish between the term “solar activity”
    and “sunspot activity” etc.

    Far worse, science never work by press release by this institution or that. Our purpose
    of calling some attentions to our own paper in the Advances in Space Research is indeed
    to share what we have independently (clearly without any needs or helps from you or your work?)
    found. Please remember that we are applying our own methodology and follow our own analyses and new
    findings that you apparently have not shown nor did?

    We can debate the problem of the solar deficit in the 21st century. Because that will have
    repercussions on different human activities (food production, health, energy, etc.).
    We can discuss this in English or Russian without any problem.

    In our paper:
    Does Machine Learning reconstruct missing sunspots and forecast a new solar minimum?

    You can find the references to my works related to solar minima in the 21st century that
    I have reported since 2008

    The website is as follows:

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0273117721002465?dgcid=author

    Although I am not a citizen of the British Empire, I occasionally read the newspaper
    “The Ecomist” and send a note published in 2008 by Philip Stott, Emeritus professor of biogeography,
    University of London. This is just to show that even in England they knew about
    my scientific results in 2008.

    Of course, I wish you good health at this time of one of the many pandemics that
    we will have in the 21st century due to the solar deficit and much success in your scientific work.
    In addition, I will always be willing to discuss and collaborate for the good of humanity.

    Respectfully

    Velasco Herrera Victor Manuel Naumovich
    Solar Radiation Laboratory
    Institute of Geophysics
    National Autonomous University of Mexico

    https://www.economist.com/letters/2008/09/25/on-global-warming-islamic-finance-biogen-idec-traffic-jams-the-balkans-american-rednecks

    On global warming, Islamic finance, Biogen Idec, traffic jams, the Balkans, American rednecks
    – Sep 25th 2008

    Cooling the planet

    SIR – Your assertion that “global warming is happening faster than expected” exhibits
    a disturbing degree of cognitive dissonance (“Adapt or die”, September 13th).
    Since 1998 the world’s average surface temperature has exhibited no warming,
    according to all the main temperature records. The trend has been a combination of
    flatlining and cooling, with a marked plunge over the past year; many countries,
    including Australia, Canada, China and the United States, experienced severe winters.

    Moreover, recent work demonstrates that the Earth’s temperature may stay roughly the same
    for at least a further decade through the impact of the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation.
    In addition, the next 11-year cycle of solar storms — Solar Cycle 24 — is late by more than two years.
    The sun is currently spotless, conditions that obtained during the “Dalton Minimum”,
    an especially cold period that lasted several decades starting from 1790 and which was implicated
    in the rout of Napoleon’s Grand Army during the retreat from Moscow in 1812.

    Finally, one expert, Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera of the National Autonomous University of Mexico,
    has gone so far as to give warning that the Earth may enter a new “Little Ice Age” for up to 80 years
    because of decreases in solar activity. The immediate portents thus point in the direction of a cooling period.

    Whatever one thinks about longer-term trends in world average temperatures and their possible
    relationship with carbon emissions, it cannot be claimed that currently “global warming is
    happening faster than expected”. It troubles me when a publication with the standing of
    The Economist permits such a gap between observed reality and political rhetoric.

    Philip Stott
    Emeritus professor of biogeography
    University of London
    London

    1. prioris

      Your saying the pandemic is real and due to blah blah blah.
      Can you be so politically naïve about the world around you.

      Far worse, science never work by press release by this institution or that… this is standard operation for mainstream science and what is taught in schools for last 100 years

      As fellow scientists, we must be very careful when we claim to be the first to report a scientific result… your nitpicking … so what if she ignored your work … why does she have to be super careful … the people announcing the finding of a black hole don’t have to be

  11. robertL

    Cap Allon
    Do we also need to acknowledge the contribution from Irina Kitiashvili???

  12. robertL

    Cap Allon,
    Can we use AI to go backwards before 1700 to say 1100 or whatever year is relevant and interesting?

  13. Victor Velasco Herrera

    Yes, it is possible, for example:

    Reconstruction and Prediction of the Total Solar Irradiance: From the Medieval Warm Period to the 21st century

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264122580_Reconstruction_and_Prediction_of_the_Total_Solar_Irradiance_From_the_Medieval_Warm_Period_to_the_21st_century

Leave a Comment