Перейти к основному содержанию
AkademIndex

Продукты

Для разработчиков

AkademBaseОткрытый API экосистемы
Статья

Scientific and Human Errors in a Snow Model Intercomparison

Cécile B. MénardSchool of Geosciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United KingdomRichard EsserySchool of Geosciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United KingdomGerhard KrinnerInstitut de Géosciences de l—Environnement, Université Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, Grenoble, FrancehGabriele ArduiniEuropean Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, Reading, United KingdomPaul BartlettClimate Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Toronto, Ontario, CanadaAaron BooneCNRM, Université de Toulouse, Météo-France, CNRS, Toulouse, FranceClaire Brutel-VuilmetInstitut de Géosciences de l—Environnement, Université Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, Grenoble, FranceEleanor BurkeMet Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, United KingdomMatthias CuntzUniversité de Lorraine, AgroParisTech, INRAE, UMR Silva, Nancy, FranceYongjiu DaiSchool of Atmospheric Sciences, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, ChinaBertrand DecharmeClimate Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Toronto, Ontario, CanadaEmanuel DutraInstituto Dom Luiz, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, PortugalXing FangCentre for Hydrology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, CanadaCharles FierzYeugeniy M. GusevInstitute of Water Problems, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, RussiaStefan HagemannVanessa HaverdCSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, AustraliaHyungjun KimInstitute of Industrial Science, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, JapanMatthieu LafaysseGrenoble Alpes, Université de Toulouse, Météo-France, CNRS, CNRM, Centre d—Etudes de la Neige, Grenoble, FranceThomas MarkeDepartment of Geography, University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, AustriaО. Н. НасоноваInstitute of Water Problems, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, RussiaTomoko NittaInstitute of Industrial Science, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, JapanMasashi NiwanoMeteorological Research Institute, Japan Meteorological Agency, Tsukuba, JapanJohn W. PomeroyCentre for Hydrology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, CanadaGerd SchädlerInstitute of Meteorology and Climate Research, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Karlsruhe, GermanyВ. А. СеменовA.M. Obukhov Institute of Atmospheric Physics, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, RussiaTatiana G. SmirnovaCooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Science, and NOAA/Earth System Research Laboratory, Boulder, ColoradoUlrich StrasserDepartment of Geography, University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, AustriaSean SwensonAdvanced Study Program, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, ColoradoD. V. TurkovInstitute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, RussiaNander WeverDepartment of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, Colorado, and WSL Institute for Snow and Avalanche Research SLF, Davos, SwitzerlandHua YuanSchool of Atmospheric Sciences, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
2020en
ABI

Аннотация

Abstract Twenty-seven models participated in the Earth System Model–Snow Model Intercomparison Project (ESM-SnowMIP), the most data-rich MIP dedicated to snow modeling. Our findings do not support the hypothesis advanced by previous snow MIPs: evaluating models against more variables and providing evaluation datasets extended temporally and spatially does not facilitate identification of key new processes requiring improvement to model snow mass and energy budgets, even at point scales. In fact, the same modeling issues identified by previous snow MIPs arose: albedo is a major source of uncertainty, surface exchange parameterizations are problematic, and individual model performance is inconsistent. This lack of progress is attributed partly to the large number of human errors that led to anomalous model behavior and to numerous resubmissions. It is unclear how widespread such errors are in our field and others; dedicated time and resources will be needed to tackle this issue to prevent highly sophisticated models and their research outputs from being vulnerable because of avoidable human mistakes. The design of and the data available to successive snow MIPs were also questioned. Evaluation of models against bulk snow properties was found to be sufficient for some but inappropriate for more complex snow models whose skills at simulating internal snow properties remained untested. Discussions between the authors of this paper on the purpose of MIPs revealed varied, and sometimes contradictory, motivations behind their participation. These findings started a collaborative effort to adapt future snow MIPs to respond to the diverse needs of the community.

Перевод пока недоступен

Идентификаторы

Цитирования и источники

Цитирований: 5Использованных источников: 0