National Weather Service Reportedly Published AI-Generated Forecast Map With Fabricated Idaho Town Names

A U.S. National Weather Service office reportedly posted an AI-generated wind forecast map for Camas Prairie, Idaho that contained fabricated and misspelled place names, including non-existent towns. The image was reportedly shared publicly on social media before being deleted and corrected. NWS confirmed a generative AI tool had been used to create the base map.

Risk classification

• Primary risk domain: 3 Misinformation
• Primary risk subdomain: 3.1 False or misleading information

The AI system generated a weather forecast map containing fabricated, non-existent town names, which was then published officially, spreading false information to the public.

Additional risk subdomains

• 7.3 Lack of capability or robustness: The generative AI model failed to reliably generate accurate geographical names, exhibiting a hallucination error.
• 5.1 Overreliance and unsafe use: NWS staff relied on the AI-generated graphic without performing adequate quality control or verification before posting it publicly.

Causal factors

• Entity: AI
• Intent: Unintentional
• Timing: Post-deployment

The incident was caused by the generative AI system hallucinating non-existent town names on a weather forecast map, which was an unintentional outcome post-deployment.

EU AI Act risk tier

• Risk tier: 3 Limited Risk

Risk Level 3. Limited Risk: The system is a generative AI tool used to produce AI-generated content (a forecast graphic), which carries transparency obligations to ensure users are informed of its AI-generated nature.

AI system and alleged parties

• AI system: generative AI tool
• AI purpose: Image Generation; Technical Text Generation
• Behaviour type: Assistant
• Alleged developer: Unknown generative AI developers
• Alleged deployer: National Weather Service
• Alleged harmed parties: Residents of Camas Prairie, Idaho, General public of Idaho, General public, Epistemic integrity

Harm severity

Severity ratings are based on this scale.

Highest direct severity in any category: Negligible. Severity is scored from Negligible to Catastrophic in each harm category, for harm the reports describe as caused directly or indirectly by the AI system.

• Physical: direct Negligible, indirect Negligible
• Infrastructure: direct Negligible, indirect Negligible
• Property: direct Negligible, indirect Negligible
• Financial: direct Negligible, indirect Negligible
• Environmental: direct Negligible, indirect Negligible
• Malicious content: direct Negligible, indirect Negligible
• Differential treatment: direct Negligible, indirect Negligible
• Civil rights: direct Negligible, indirect Negligible
• Democracy: direct Negligible, indirect Negligible
• Privacy: direct Negligible, indirect Negligible
• Psychological: direct Negligible, indirect Negligible
• Epistemic: direct Negligible, indirect Negligible
• Child sexual exploitation and abuse: direct Negligible, indirect Negligible

People affected

• Occurrences reported: 1
• People reportedly exposed: 1000

Potential causes

Management

• Staffing Reductions: Government-wide downsizing led to severe staff shortages and high strain.
• Permissive AI Adoption: Management allowed experimenting with AI without establishing guardrails.

Technology

• Generative AI Hallucinations: GenAI created fictitious town names like Orangeotild on the weather map.
• Unreliable Graphics Generation: AI tools generated illegible text and incorrect logos on the forecast map.

Human Factors

• Lack of AI Training: Staff lacked training to identify and double-check AI hallucinations.
• Oversight in Labeling: Staff failed to label the experimental AI-generated graphic as required.
• Increased Employee Strain: Staffing shortages left remaining employees overworked and prone to errors.

Process and Methods

• Inadequate Review Processes: No rigorous testing or review was done before posting the graphic.
• Unlabeled Experimental Products: Experimental maps were published without proper labels indicating AI use.

Regulatory Environment

• Lack of AI Guidelines: No clear federal rules or restrictions governed generative AI use at NWS.

Information quality

• Classification confidence: High
• Reason for confidence: The report clearly details the incident, the specific error (hallucinated town names), the agency involved (NWS), and the technology used (generative AI, specifically referencing Gemini in a related post). The facts are straightforward and uncontested.
• Ambiguities identified: It is not fully confirmed whether the South Dakota post also used generative AI, though it featured similar errors and the Gemini logo.

A local National Weather Service office posted an AI-generated forecast map containing hallucinated town names. While the immediate physical and security impacts are negligible, the incident highlights minor risks to public trust in official government communications and underscores the need for human verification protocols when deploying generative AI tools.

• Overall national security impact: Minor
• Scope: Single nation
• Primary target: United States
• Alleged perpetrator: Unknown

Threat characteristics

• Imminence: Long-term. The event represents a strategic concern regarding AI adoption and quality control in government communications rather than an active crisis.
• Autonomy: Human-controlled. The AI was used as an assistant to generate the base map, with human staff retaining control over publishing the final post.
• Novelty: Established threat. Generative AI hallucinations and errors in text and image generation are well-documented and established issues.

Impact by dimension

• Physical security: Negligible. The wind forecast was mild with low immediate safety impacts, resulting in no physical damage or threat to critical infrastructure.
• Information security: Negligible. No malicious disinformation campaign or intelligence compromise occurred; the incident was an unintentional AI hallucination.
• Sovereignty: Minor. The incident caused minor embarrassment and a temporary risk of eroding public trust in official National Weather Service communications, but was quickly corrected.
• Economic security: Negligible. There was no impact on financial systems, strategic technology, or economic stability.
• Societal stability: Negligible. No threats to social cohesion, civil liberties, or human rights were reported.