Articles | Volume 18, issue 4
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-921-2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-921-2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Development and technical paper
| 
19 Feb 2025
Development and technical paper |
| 19 Feb 2025
| 19 Feb 2025
Advances in land surface forecasting: a comparison of LSTM, gradient boosting, and feed-forward neural networks as prognostic state emulators in a case study with ecLand
Marieke Wesselkamp
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Department of Biometry, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
Matthew Chantry
European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, Reading, United Kingdom
Ewan Pinnington
European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, Reading, United Kingdom
Margarita Choulga
European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, Reading, United Kingdom
Souhail Boussetta
European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, Reading, United Kingdom
Maria Kalweit
Department of Computer Science, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
Joschka Bödecker
Department of Computer Science, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
BrainLinks-BrainTools, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
Carsten F. Dormann
Department of Biometry, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
Florian Pappenberger
European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, Reading, United Kingdom
Gianpaolo Balsamo
European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, Reading, United Kingdom
World Meteorological Organization, Geneva, Switzerland
Related authors
No articles found.
Ather Abbas, Yuan Yang, Ming Pan, Yves Tramblay, Chaopeng Shen, Haoyu Ji, Solomon H. Gebrechorkos, Florian Pappenberger, Jong Cheol Pyo, Dapeng Feng, George Huffman, Phu Nguyen, Christian Massari, Luca Brocca, Tan Jackson, and Hylke E. Beck
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-4194, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-4194, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Our study evaluated 23 precipitation datasets using a hydrological model at global scale to assess their suitability and accuracy. We found that MSWEP V2.8 excels due to its ability to integrate data from multiple sources, while others, such as IMERG and JRA-3Q, demonstrated strong regional performances. This research assists in selecting the appropriate dataset for applications in water resource management, hazard assessment, agriculture, and environmental monitoring.
Thomas Rackow, Xabier Pedruzo-Bagazgoitia, Tobias Becker, Sebastian Milinski, Irina Sandu, Razvan Aguridan, Peter Bechtold, Sebastian Beyer, Jean Bidlot, Souhail Boussetta, Willem Deconinck, Michail Diamantakis, Peter Dueben, Emanuel Dutra, Richard Forbes, Rohit Ghosh, Helge F. Goessling, Ioan Hadade, Jan Hegewald, Thomas Jung, Sarah Keeley, Lukas Kluft, Nikolay Koldunov, Aleksei Koldunov, Tobias Kölling, Josh Kousal, Christian Kühnlein, Pedro Maciel, Kristian Mogensen, Tiago Quintino, Inna Polichtchouk, Balthasar Reuter, Domokos Sármány, Patrick Scholz, Dmitry Sidorenko, Jan Streffing, Birgit Sützl, Daisuke Takasuka, Steffen Tietsche, Mirco Valentini, Benoît Vannière, Nils Wedi, Lorenzo Zampieri, and Florian Ziemen
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 33–69, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-33-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-33-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Detailed global climate model simulations have been created based on a numerical weather prediction model, offering more accurate spatial detail down to the scale of individual cities ("kilometre-scale") and a better understanding of climate phenomena such as atmospheric storms, whirls in the ocean, and cracks in sea ice. The new model aims to provide globally consistent information on local climate change with greater precision, benefiting environmental planning and local impact modelling.
Gab Abramowitz, Anna Ukkola, Sanaa Hobeichi, Jon Cranko Page, Mathew Lipson, Martin G. De Kauwe, Samuel Green, Claire Brenner, Jonathan Frame, Grey Nearing, Martyn Clark, Martin Best, Peter Anthoni, Gabriele Arduini, Souhail Boussetta, Silvia Caldararu, Kyeungwoo Cho, Matthias Cuntz, David Fairbairn, Craig R. Ferguson, Hyungjun Kim, Yeonjoo Kim, Jürgen Knauer, David Lawrence, Xiangzhong Luo, Sergey Malyshev, Tomoko Nitta, Jerome Ogee, Keith Oleson, Catherine Ottlé, Phillipe Peylin, Patricia de Rosnay, Heather Rumbold, Bob Su, Nicolas Vuichard, Anthony P. Walker, Xiaoni Wang-Faivre, Yunfei Wang, and Yijian Zeng
Biogeosciences, 21, 5517–5538, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5517-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5517-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This paper evaluates land models – computer-based models that simulate ecosystem dynamics; land carbon, water, and energy cycles; and the role of land in the climate system. It uses machine learning and AI approaches to show that, despite the complexity of land models, they do not perform nearly as well as they could given the amount of information they are provided with about the prediction problem.
Sven Armin Westermann, Anke Hildebrandt, Souhail Bousetta, and Stephan Thober
Biogeosciences, 21, 5277–5303, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5277-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5277-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Plants at the land surface mediate between soil and the atmosphere regarding water and carbon transport. Since plant growth is a dynamic process, models need to consider these dynamics. Two models that predict water and carbon fluxes by considering plant temporal evolution were tested against observational data. Currently, dynamizing plants in these models did not enhance their representativeness, which is caused by a mismatch between implemented physical relations and observable connections.
Cecile B. Menard, Sirpa Rasmus, Ioanna Merkouriadi, Gianpaolo Balsamo, Annett Bartsch, Chris Derksen, Florent Domine, Marie Dumont, Dorothee Ehrich, Richard Essery, Bruce C. Forbes, Gerhard Krinner, David Lawrence, Glen Liston, Heidrun Matthes, Nick Rutter, Melody Sandells, Martin Schneebeli, and Sari Stark
The Cryosphere, 18, 4671–4686, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-4671-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-4671-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Computer models, like those used in climate change studies, are written by modellers who have to decide how best to construct the models in order to satisfy the purpose they serve. Using snow modelling as an example, we examine the process behind the decisions to understand what motivates or limits modellers in their decision-making. We find that the context in which research is undertaken is often more crucial than scientific limitations. We argue for more transparency in our research practice.
Margarita Choulga, Francesca Moschini, Cinzia Mazzetti, Stefania Grimaldi, Juliana Disperati, Hylke Beck, Peter Salamon, and Christel Prudhomme
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 2991–3036, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-2991-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-2991-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
CEMS_SurfaceFields_2022 dataset is a new set of high-resolution maps for land type (e.g. lake, forest), soil properties and population water needs at approximately 2 and 6 km at the Equator, covering Europe and the globe (excluding Antarctica). We describe what and how new high-resolution information can be used to create the dataset. The paper suggests that the dataset can be used as input for river, weather or other models, as well as for statistical descriptions of the region of interest.
Jasper M. C. Denissen, Adriaan J. Teuling, Sujan Koirala, Markus Reichstein, Gianpaolo Balsamo, Martha M. Vogel, Xin Yu, and René Orth
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 717–734, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-717-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-717-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Heat extremes have severe implications for human health and ecosystems. Heat extremes are mostly introduced by large-scale atmospheric circulation but can be modulated by vegetation. Vegetation with access to water uses solar energy to evaporate water into the atmosphere. Under dry conditions, water may not be available, suppressing evaporation and heating the atmosphere. Using climate projections, we show that regionally less water is available for vegetation, intensifying future heat extremes.
Dominik L. Schumacher, Mariam Zachariah, Friederike Otto, Clair Barnes, Sjoukje Philip, Sarah Kew, Maja Vahlberg, Roop Singh, Dorothy Heinrich, Julie Arrighi, Maarten van Aalst, Mathias Hauser, Martin Hirschi, Verena Bessenbacher, Lukas Gudmundsson, Hiroko K. Beaudoing, Matthew Rodell, Sihan Li, Wenchang Yang, Gabriel A. Vecchi, Luke J. Harrington, Flavio Lehner, Gianpaolo Balsamo, and Sonia I. Seneviratne
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 131–154, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-131-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-131-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The 2022 summer was accompanied by widespread soil moisture deficits, including an unprecedented drought in Europe. Combining several observation-based estimates and models, we find that such an event has become at least 5 and 20 times more likely due to human-induced climate change in western Europe and the northern extratropics, respectively. Strong regional warming fuels soil desiccation; hence, projections indicate even more potent future droughts as we progress towards a 2 °C warmer world.
Tom Kimpson, Margarita Choulga, Matthew Chantry, Gianpaolo Balsamo, Souhail Boussetta, Peter Dueben, and Tim Palmer
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 4661–4685, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-4661-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-4661-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Lakes play an important role when we try to explain and predict the weather. More accurate and up-to-date description of lakes all around the world for numerical models is a continuous task. However, it is difficult to assess the impact of updated lake description within a weather prediction system. In this work, we develop a method to quickly and automatically define how, where, and when updated lake description affects weather prediction.
Gregory Duveiller, Mark Pickering, Joaquin Muñoz-Sabater, Luca Caporaso, Souhail Boussetta, Gianpaolo Balsamo, and Alessandro Cescatti
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 7357–7373, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-7357-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-7357-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Some of our best tools to describe the state of the land system, including the intensity of heat waves, have a problem. The model currently assumes that the number of leaves in ecosystems always follows the same cycle. By using satellite observations of when leaves are present, we show that capturing the yearly changes in this cycle is important to avoid errors in estimating surface temperature. We show that this has strong implications for our capacity to describe heat waves across Europe.
Fransje van Oorschot, Ruud J. van der Ent, Markus Hrachowitz, Emanuele Di Carlo, Franco Catalano, Souhail Boussetta, Gianpaolo Balsamo, and Andrea Alessandri
Earth Syst. Dynam., 14, 1239–1259, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-1239-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-14-1239-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Vegetation largely controls land hydrology by transporting water from the subsurface to the atmosphere through roots and is highly variable in space and time. However, current land surface models have limitations in capturing this variability at a global scale, limiting accurate modeling of land hydrology. We found that satellite-based vegetation variability considerably improved modeled land hydrology and therefore has potential to improve climate predictions of, for example, droughts.
Matthew J. McGrath, Ana Maria Roxana Petrescu, Philippe Peylin, Robbie M. Andrew, Bradley Matthews, Frank Dentener, Juraj Balkovič, Vladislav Bastrikov, Meike Becker, Gregoire Broquet, Philippe Ciais, Audrey Fortems-Cheiney, Raphael Ganzenmüller, Giacomo Grassi, Ian Harris, Matthew Jones, Jürgen Knauer, Matthias Kuhnert, Guillaume Monteil, Saqr Munassar, Paul I. Palmer, Glen P. Peters, Chunjing Qiu, Mart-Jan Schelhaas, Oksana Tarasova, Matteo Vizzarri, Karina Winkler, Gianpaolo Balsamo, Antoine Berchet, Peter Briggs, Patrick Brockmann, Frédéric Chevallier, Giulia Conchedda, Monica Crippa, Stijn N. C. Dellaert, Hugo A. C. Denier van der Gon, Sara Filipek, Pierre Friedlingstein, Richard Fuchs, Michael Gauss, Christoph Gerbig, Diego Guizzardi, Dirk Günther, Richard A. Houghton, Greet Janssens-Maenhout, Ronny Lauerwald, Bas Lerink, Ingrid T. Luijkx, Géraud Moulas, Marilena Muntean, Gert-Jan Nabuurs, Aurélie Paquirissamy, Lucia Perugini, Wouter Peters, Roberto Pilli, Julia Pongratz, Pierre Regnier, Marko Scholze, Yusuf Serengil, Pete Smith, Efisio Solazzo, Rona L. Thompson, Francesco N. Tubiello, Timo Vesala, and Sophia Walther
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 4295–4370, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-4295-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-4295-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Accurate estimation of fluxes of carbon dioxide from the land surface is essential for understanding future impacts of greenhouse gas emissions on the climate system. A wide variety of methods currently exist to estimate these sources and sinks. We are continuing work to develop annual comparisons of these diverse methods in order to clarify what they all actually calculate and to resolve apparent disagreement, in addition to highlighting opportunities for increased understanding.
Anna Agustí-Panareda, Jérôme Barré, Sébastien Massart, Antje Inness, Ilse Aben, Melanie Ades, Bianca C. Baier, Gianpaolo Balsamo, Tobias Borsdorff, Nicolas Bousserez, Souhail Boussetta, Michael Buchwitz, Luca Cantarello, Cyril Crevoisier, Richard Engelen, Henk Eskes, Johannes Flemming, Sébastien Garrigues, Otto Hasekamp, Vincent Huijnen, Luke Jones, Zak Kipling, Bavo Langerock, Joe McNorton, Nicolas Meilhac, Stefan Noël, Mark Parrington, Vincent-Henri Peuch, Michel Ramonet, Miha Razinger, Maximilian Reuter, Roberto Ribas, Martin Suttie, Colm Sweeney, Jérôme Tarniewicz, and Lianghai Wu
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 3829–3859, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-3829-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-3829-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We present a global dataset of atmospheric CO2 and CH4, the two most important human-made greenhouse gases, which covers almost 2 decades (2003–2020). It is produced by combining satellite data of CO2 and CH4 with a weather and air composition prediction model, and it has been carefully evaluated against independent observations to ensure validity and point out deficiencies to the user. This dataset can be used for scientific studies in the field of climate change and the global carbon cycle.
Ana Maria Roxana Petrescu, Chunjing Qiu, Matthew J. McGrath, Philippe Peylin, Glen P. Peters, Philippe Ciais, Rona L. Thompson, Aki Tsuruta, Dominik Brunner, Matthias Kuhnert, Bradley Matthews, Paul I. Palmer, Oksana Tarasova, Pierre Regnier, Ronny Lauerwald, David Bastviken, Lena Höglund-Isaksson, Wilfried Winiwarter, Giuseppe Etiope, Tuula Aalto, Gianpaolo Balsamo, Vladislav Bastrikov, Antoine Berchet, Patrick Brockmann, Giancarlo Ciotoli, Giulia Conchedda, Monica Crippa, Frank Dentener, Christine D. Groot Zwaaftink, Diego Guizzardi, Dirk Günther, Jean-Matthieu Haussaire, Sander Houweling, Greet Janssens-Maenhout, Massaer Kouyate, Adrian Leip, Antti Leppänen, Emanuele Lugato, Manon Maisonnier, Alistair J. Manning, Tiina Markkanen, Joe McNorton, Marilena Muntean, Gabriel D. Oreggioni, Prabir K. Patra, Lucia Perugini, Isabelle Pison, Maarit T. Raivonen, Marielle Saunois, Arjo J. Segers, Pete Smith, Efisio Solazzo, Hanqin Tian, Francesco N. Tubiello, Timo Vesala, Guido R. van der Werf, Chris Wilson, and Sönke Zaehle
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 1197–1268, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-1197-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-1197-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
This study updates the state-of-the-art scientific overview of CH4 and N2O emissions in the EU27 and UK in Petrescu et al. (2021a). Yearly updates are needed to improve the different respective approaches and to inform on the development of formal verification systems. It integrates the most recent emission inventories, process-based model and regional/global inversions, comparing them with UNFCCC national GHG inventories, in support to policy to facilitate real-time verification procedures.
Kieran M. R. Hunt, Gwyneth R. Matthews, Florian Pappenberger, and Christel Prudhomme
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 5449–5472, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-5449-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-5449-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
In this study, we use three models to forecast river streamflow operationally for 13 months (September 2020 to October 2021) at 10 gauges in the western US. The first model is a state-of-the-art physics-based streamflow model (GloFAS). The second applies a bias-correction technique to GloFAS. The third is a type of neural network (an LSTM). We find that all three are capable of producing skilful forecasts but that the LSTM performs the best, with skilful 5 d forecasts at nine stations.
Melissa Ruiz-Vásquez, Sungmin O, Alexander Brenning, Randal D. Koster, Gianpaolo Balsamo, Ulrich Weber, Gabriele Arduini, Ana Bastos, Markus Reichstein, and René Orth
Earth Syst. Dynam., 13, 1451–1471, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-1451-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-1451-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Subseasonal forecasts facilitate early warning of extreme events; however their predictability sources are not fully explored. We find that global temperature forecast errors in many regions are related to climate variables such as solar radiation and precipitation, as well as land surface variables such as soil moisture and evaporative fraction. A better representation of these variables in the forecasting and data assimilation systems can support the accuracy of temperature forecasts.
Joe McNorton, Nicolas Bousserez, Anna Agustí-Panareda, Gianpaolo Balsamo, Luca Cantarello, Richard Engelen, Vincent Huijnen, Antje Inness, Zak Kipling, Mark Parrington, and Roberto Ribas
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 5961–5981, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-5961-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-5961-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Concentrations of atmospheric methane continue to grow, in recent years at an increasing rate, for unknown reasons. Using newly available satellite observations and a state-of-the-art weather prediction model we perform global estimates of emissions from hotspots at high resolution. Results show that the system can accurately report on biases in national inventories and is used to conclude that the early COVID-19 slowdown period (March–June 2020) had little impact on global methane emissions.
Ralf Döscher, Mario Acosta, Andrea Alessandri, Peter Anthoni, Thomas Arsouze, Tommi Bergman, Raffaele Bernardello, Souhail Boussetta, Louis-Philippe Caron, Glenn Carver, Miguel Castrillo, Franco Catalano, Ivana Cvijanovic, Paolo Davini, Evelien Dekker, Francisco J. Doblas-Reyes, David Docquier, Pablo Echevarria, Uwe Fladrich, Ramon Fuentes-Franco, Matthias Gröger, Jost v. Hardenberg, Jenny Hieronymus, M. Pasha Karami, Jukka-Pekka Keskinen, Torben Koenigk, Risto Makkonen, François Massonnet, Martin Ménégoz, Paul A. Miller, Eduardo Moreno-Chamarro, Lars Nieradzik, Twan van Noije, Paul Nolan, Declan O'Donnell, Pirkka Ollinaho, Gijs van den Oord, Pablo Ortega, Oriol Tintó Prims, Arthur Ramos, Thomas Reerink, Clement Rousset, Yohan Ruprich-Robert, Philippe Le Sager, Torben Schmith, Roland Schrödner, Federico Serva, Valentina Sicardi, Marianne Sloth Madsen, Benjamin Smith, Tian Tian, Etienne Tourigny, Petteri Uotila, Martin Vancoppenolle, Shiyu Wang, David Wårlind, Ulrika Willén, Klaus Wyser, Shuting Yang, Xavier Yepes-Arbós, and Qiong Zhang
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 2973–3020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2973-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2973-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The Earth system model EC-Earth3 is documented here. Key performance metrics show physical behavior and biases well within the frame known from recent models. With improved physical and dynamic features, new ESM components, community tools, and largely improved physical performance compared to the CMIP5 version, EC-Earth3 represents a clear step forward for the only European community ESM. We demonstrate here that EC-Earth3 is suited for a range of tasks in CMIP6 and beyond.
Margarita Choulga, Greet Janssens-Maenhout, Ingrid Super, Efisio Solazzo, Anna Agusti-Panareda, Gianpaolo Balsamo, Nicolas Bousserez, Monica Crippa, Hugo Denier van der Gon, Richard Engelen, Diego Guizzardi, Jeroen Kuenen, Joe McNorton, Gabriel Oreggioni, and Antoon Visschedijk
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 5311–5335, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-5311-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-5311-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
People worry that growing man-made carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations lead to climate change. Global models, use of observations, and datasets can help us better understand behaviour of CO2. Here a tool to compute uncertainty in man-made CO2 sources per country per year and month is presented. An example of all sources separated into seven groups (intensive and average energy, industry, humans, ground and air transport, others) is presented. Results will be used to predict CO2 concentrations.
Joaquín Muñoz-Sabater, Emanuel Dutra, Anna Agustí-Panareda, Clément Albergel, Gabriele Arduini, Gianpaolo Balsamo, Souhail Boussetta, Margarita Choulga, Shaun Harrigan, Hans Hersbach, Brecht Martens, Diego G. Miralles, María Piles, Nemesio J. Rodríguez-Fernández, Ervin Zsoter, Carlo Buontempo, and Jean-Noël Thépaut
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 4349–4383, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-4349-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-4349-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The creation of ERA5-Land responds to a growing number of applications requiring global land datasets at a resolution higher than traditionally reached. ERA5-Land provides operational, global, and hourly key variables of the water and energy cycles over land surfaces, at 9 km resolution, from 1981 until the present. This work provides evidence of an overall improvement of the water cycle compared to previous reanalyses, whereas the energy cycle variables perform as well as those of ERA5.
Chloe Brimicombe, Claudia Di Napoli, Rosalind Cornforth, Florian Pappenberger, Celia Petty, and Hannah L. Cloke
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2021-242, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2021-242, 2021
Revised manuscript not accepted
Short summary
Short summary
Heatwaves are an increasing risk to African communities. This hazard can have a negative impact on peoples lives and in some cases results in their death. This study shows new information about heatwave characteristics through a list of heatwave events that have been reported for the African continent from 1980 until 2020. Case studies are useful helps to inform the development of early warning systems and forecasting, which is an urgent priority and needs significant improvement.
Yongkang Xue, Tandong Yao, Aaron A. Boone, Ismaila Diallo, Ye Liu, Xubin Zeng, William K. M. Lau, Shiori Sugimoto, Qi Tang, Xiaoduo Pan, Peter J. van Oevelen, Daniel Klocke, Myung-Seo Koo, Tomonori Sato, Zhaohui Lin, Yuhei Takaya, Constantin Ardilouze, Stefano Materia, Subodh K. Saha, Retish Senan, Tetsu Nakamura, Hailan Wang, Jing Yang, Hongliang Zhang, Mei Zhao, Xin-Zhong Liang, J. David Neelin, Frederic Vitart, Xin Li, Ping Zhao, Chunxiang Shi, Weidong Guo, Jianping Tang, Miao Yu, Yun Qian, Samuel S. P. Shen, Yang Zhang, Kun Yang, Ruby Leung, Yuan Qiu, Daniele Peano, Xin Qi, Yanling Zhan, Michael A. Brunke, Sin Chan Chou, Michael Ek, Tianyi Fan, Hong Guan, Hai Lin, Shunlin Liang, Helin Wei, Shaocheng Xie, Haoran Xu, Weiping Li, Xueli Shi, Paulo Nobre, Yan Pan, Yi Qin, Jeff Dozier, Craig R. Ferguson, Gianpaolo Balsamo, Qing Bao, Jinming Feng, Jinkyu Hong, Songyou Hong, Huilin Huang, Duoying Ji, Zhenming Ji, Shichang Kang, Yanluan Lin, Weiguang Liu, Ryan Muncaster, Patricia de Rosnay, Hiroshi G. Takahashi, Guiling Wang, Shuyu Wang, Weicai Wang, Xu Zhou, and Yuejian Zhu
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 4465–4494, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-4465-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-4465-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The subseasonal prediction of extreme hydroclimate events such as droughts/floods has remained stubbornly low for years. This paper presents a new international initiative which, for the first time, introduces spring land surface temperature anomalies over high mountains to improve precipitation prediction through remote effects of land–atmosphere interactions. More than 40 institutions worldwide are participating in this effort. The experimental protocol and preliminary results are presented.
Florian Pappenberger, Florence Rabier, and Fabio Venuti
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 2163–2167, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-2163-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-2163-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts mission is to deliver high-quality global medium‐range (3–15 d ahead of time) weather forecasts and monitoring of the Earth system. We have published a new strategy, and in this paper we discuss what this means for forecasting and monitoring natural hazards.
Sarah Sparrow, Andrew Bowery, Glenn D. Carver, Marcus O. Köhler, Pirkka Ollinaho, Florian Pappenberger, David Wallom, and Antje Weisheimer
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3473–3486, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3473-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3473-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes how the research version of the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts’ Integrated Forecast System is combined with climateprediction.net’s public volunteer computing resource to develop OpenIFS@home. Thousands of volunteer personal computers simulated slightly different realizations of Tropical Cyclone Karl to demonstrate the performance of the large-ensemble forecast. OpenIFS@Home offers researchers a new tool to study weather forecasts and related questions.
Efisio Solazzo, Monica Crippa, Diego Guizzardi, Marilena Muntean, Margarita Choulga, and Greet Janssens-Maenhout
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 5655–5683, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-5655-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-5655-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We conducted an extensive analysis of the structural uncertainty of the Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research (EDGAR) emission inventory of greenhouse gases, which adds a much needed reliability dimension to the accuracy of the emission estimates. The study undertakes in-depth analyses of the implication of aggregating emissions from different sources and/or countries on the accuracy. Results are presented for all emissions sectors according to IPCC definitions.
Jérôme Barré, Ilse Aben, Anna Agustí-Panareda, Gianpaolo Balsamo, Nicolas Bousserez, Peter Dueben, Richard Engelen, Antje Inness, Alba Lorente, Joe McNorton, Vincent-Henri Peuch, Gabor Radnoti, and Roberto Ribas
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 5117–5136, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-5117-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-5117-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This study presents a new approach to the systematic global detection of anomalous local CH4 concentration anomalies caused by rapid changes in anthropogenic emission levels. The approach utilises both satellite measurements and model simulations, and applies novel data analysis techniques (such as filtering and classification) to automatically detect anomalous emissions from point sources and small areas, such as oil and gas drilling sites, pipelines and facility leaks.
Thibault Guinaldo, Simon Munier, Patrick Le Moigne, Aaron Boone, Bertrand Decharme, Margarita Choulga, and Delphine J. Leroux
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 1309–1344, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1309-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-1309-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Lakes are of fundamental importance in the Earth system as they support essential environmental and economic services such as freshwater supply. Despite the impact of lakes on the water cycle, they are generally not considered in global hydrological studies. Based on a model called MLake, we assessed both the importance of lakes in simulating river flows at global scale and the value of their level variations for water resource management.
Hylke E. Beck, Ming Pan, Diego G. Miralles, Rolf H. Reichle, Wouter A. Dorigo, Sebastian Hahn, Justin Sheffield, Lanka Karthikeyan, Gianpaolo Balsamo, Robert M. Parinussa, Albert I. J. M. van Dijk, Jinyang Du, John S. Kimball, Noemi Vergopolan, and Eric F. Wood
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 17–40, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-17-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-17-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We evaluated the largest and most diverse set of surface soil moisture products ever evaluated in a single study. We found pronounced differences in performance among individual products and product groups. Our results provide guidance to choose the most suitable product for a particular application.
Cited articles
Akiba, T., Sano, S., Yanase, T., Ohta, T., and Koyama, M.: Optuna: A Next-generation Hyperparameter Optimization Framework, in: Proceedings of the 25th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining, KDD '19: The 25th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, 4–8 August 2019, Anchorage AK, USA, 2623–2631, https://doi.org/10.1145/3292500.3330701, 2019.
Baker, E., Harper, A. B., Williamson, D., and Challenor, P.: Emulation of high-resolution land surface models using sparse Gaussian processes with application to JULES, Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 1913–1929, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-1913-2022, 2022.
Balsamo, G., Bousseea, S., Dutra, E., Beljaars, A., Viterbo, P., and Van den Hurk, B.: ECMWF Newsleeer No 127, Meteorology, Spring 2011, 17–22, https://doi.org/10.21957/x1j3i7bz, 2011.
Bassi, A., Höge, M., Mira, A., Fenicia, F., and Albert, C.: Learning landscape features from streamflow with autoencoders, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 4971–4988, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4971-2024, 2024.
Bengtsson, L. K., Magnusson, L., and Källén, E.: Independent Estimations of the Asymptotic Variability in an Ensemble Forecast System, Mon. Weather Rev., 136, 4105–4112, https://doi.org/10.1175/2008MWR2526.1, 2008.
Beucler, T., Pritchard, M., Rasp, S., Ott, J., Baldi, P., and Gentine, P.: Enforcing Analytic Constraints in Neural Networks Emulating Physical Systems, Phys. Rev. Lett., 126, 098302, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.098302, 2021.
Bi, K., Xie, L., Zhang, H., Chen, X., Gu, X., and Tian, Q.: Accurate medium-range global weather forecasting with 3D neural networks, Nature, 619, 533–538, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06185-3, 2023.
Boussetta, S., Balsamo, G., Arduini, G., Dutra, E., McNorton, J., Choulga, M., Agustí-Panareda, A., Beljaars, A., Wedi, N., Munõz-Sabater, J., De Rosnay, P., Sandu, I., Hadade, I., Carver, G., Mazzetti, C., Prudhomme, C., Yamazaki, D., and Zsoter, E.: ECLand: the ECMWF land surface modelling system, Atmosphere, 12, 723, https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos12060723, 2021.
Bouthillier, X., Delaunay, P., Bronzi, M., Trofimov, A., Nichyporuk, B., Szeto, J., Sepah, N., Raff, E., Madan, K., Voleti, V., Kahou, S. E., Michalski, V., Serdyuk, D., Arbel, T., Pal, C., Varoquaux, G., and Vincent, P.: Accounting for Variance in Machine Learning Benchmarks, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2103.03098, 1 March 2021.
Brenowitz, N. D., Henn, B., McGibbon, J., Clark, S. K., Kwa, A., Perkins, W. A., Watt-Meyer, O., and Bretherton, C. S.: Machine Learning Climate Model Dynamics: Offline versus Online Performance, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2011.03081, 5 November 2020.
Chantry, M., Halield, S., Dueben, P., Polichtchouk, I., and Palmer, T.: Machine learning emulation of gravity wave drag in numerical weather forecasting, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 13, e2021MS002477, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021MS002477, 2021.
Chen, T. and Guestrin, C.: XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1603.02754, 10 June 2016.
Chen, X., Huang, J., Han, Z., Gao, H., Liu, M., Li, Z., Liu, X., Li, Q., Qi, H., and Huang, Y.: The importance of short lag-time in the runoff forecasting model based on long short-term memory, J. Hydrol., 589, 125359, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.125359, 2020.
Chen, Z., Badrinarayanan, V., Lee, C.-Y., and Rabinovich, A.: GradNorm: Gradient Normalization for Adaptive Loss Balancing in Deep Multitask Networks, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1711.02257, 19 December 2017.
Choulga, M., Kourzeneva, E., Balsamo, G., Boussetta, S., and Wedi, N.: Upgraded global mapping information for earth system modelling: an application to surface water depth at the ECMWF, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 4051–4076, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-4051-2019, 2019.
Cui, Z., Qing, X., Chai, H., Yang, S., Zhu, Y., and Wang, F.: Real-time rainfall-runoff prediction using light gradient boosting machine coupled with singular spectrum analysis, J. Hydrol., 603, 127124, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.127124, 2021.
Datta, P. and Faroughi, S. A.: A multihead LSTM technique for prognostic prediction of soil moisture, Geoderma, 433, 116452, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2023.116452, 2023.
De Rosnay, P., Balsamo, G., Albergel, C., Muñoz-Sabater, J., and Isaksen, L.: Initialisation of Land Surface Variables for Numerical Weather Prediction, Surv. Geophys., 35, 607–621, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10712-012-9207-x, 2014.
Dunkl, I., Spring, A., Friedlingstein, P., and Brovkin, V.: Process-based analysis of terrestrial carbon flux predictability, Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 1413–1426, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-1413-2021, 2021.
ECMWF: IFS Documentation CY43R3 – Part IV: Physical processes, ECMWF, https://doi.org/10.21957/EFYK72KL, 2017.
ECMWF: IFS Documentation CY48R1 – Part IV: Physical Processes, ECMWF, https://doi.org/10.21957/02054F0FBF, 2023.
Fer, I., Kelly, R., Moorcroft, P. R., Richardson, A. D., Cowdery, E. M., and Dietze, M. C.: Linking big models to big data: efficient ecosystem model calibration through Bayesian model emulation, Biogeosciences, 15, 5801–5830, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-15-5801-2018, 2018.
Gelbrecht, M., White, A., Bathiany, S., and Boers, N.: Differentiable programming for Earth system modeling, Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 3123–3135, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3123-2023, 2023.
Girshick, R.: Fast R-CNN, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1504.08083, 27 September 2015.
Goodfellow, I., Bengio, Y., and Courville, A.: Deep learning, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 775 pp., ISBN 9780262035613, 2016.
Grinsztajn, L., Oyallon, E., and Varoquaux, G.: Why do tree-based models still outperform deep learning on tabular data?, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2207.08815, 18 July 2022.
Gu, M., Wang, X., and Berger, J. O.: Robust Gaussian stochastic process emulation, Ann. Stat., 46, 3038–3066, 2018.
Guo, Y., Yu, X., Xu, Y.-P., Chen, H., Gu, H., and Xie, J.: AI-based techniques for multi-step streamflow forecasts: application for multi-objective reservoir operation optimization and performance assessment, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 5951–5979, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5951-2021, 2021.
Guo, Z., Dirmeyer, P. A., and DelSole, T.: Land surface impacts on subseasonal and seasonal predictability: land impacts subseasonal predictability, Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, L24812, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GL049945, 2011.
Hatfield, S., Chantry, M., Dueben, P., Lopez, P., Geer, A., and Palmer, T.: Building Tangent-Linear and Adjoint Models for Data Assimilation With Neural Networks, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 13, e2021MS002521, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021MS002521, 2021.
Hersbach, H., Bell, B., Berrisford, P., Hirahara, S., Horányi, A., Muñoz-Sabater, J., Nicolas, J., Peubey, C., Radu, R., Schepers, D., Simmons, A., Soci, C., Abdalla, S., Abellan, X., Balsamo, G., Bechtold, P., Biavati, G., Bidlot, J., Bonavita, M., De Chiara, G., Dahlgren, P., Dee, D., Diamantakis, M., Dragani, R., Flemming, J., Forbes, R., Fuentes, M., Geer, A., Haimberger, L., Healy, S., Hogan, R. J., Hólm, E., Janisková, M., Keeley, S., Laloyaux, P., Lopez, P., Lupu, C., Radnoti, G., De Rosnay, P., Rozum, I., Vamborg, F., Villaume, S., and Thépaut, J.: The ERA5 global reanalysis, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 146, 1999–2049, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.3803, 2020.
Hochreiter, S. and Schmidhuber, J.: Long Short-Term Memory, Neural Comput., 9, 1735–1780, https://doi.org/10.1162/neco.1997.9.8.1735, 1997.
Irrgang, C., Boers, N., Sonnewald, M., Barnes, E. A., Kadow, C., Staneva, J., and Saynisch-Wagner, J.: Towards neural Earth system modelling by integrating artificial intelligence in Earth system science, Nature Machine Intelligence, 3, 667–674, https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-021-00374-3, 2021.
James, W. and Stein, C.: Estimation with Quadratic Loss, in: Breakthroughs in Statistics, edited by: Kotz, S. and Johnson, N. L., Springer New York, New York, NY, 443–460, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-0919-5_30, 1992.
Kadra, A., Lindauer, M., Hutter, F., and Grabocka, J.: Well-tuned Simple Nets Excel on Tabular Datasets, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2106.11189, 5 November 2021.
Keisler, R.: Forecasting Global Weather with Graph Neural Networks, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2202.07575, 15 February 2022.
Kimpson, T., Choulga, M., Chantry, M., Balsamo, G., Boussetta, S., Dueben, P., and Palmer, T.: Deep learning for quality control of surface physiographic fields using satellite Earth observations, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 4661–4685, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-4661-2023, 2023.
Kingma, D. P. and Ba, J.: Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1412.6980, 30 January 2017.
Kratzert, F., Herrnegger, M., Klotz, D., Hochreiter, S., and Klambauer, G.: NeuralHydrology – Interpreting LSTMs in Hydrology, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1903.07903, 12 November 2019a.
Kratzert, F., Klotz, D., Shalev, G., Klambauer, G., Hochreiter, S., and Nearing, G.: Towards learning universal, regional, and local hydrological behaviors via machine learning applied to large-sample datasets, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 5089–5110, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-5089-2019, 2019b.
Lam, R., Sanchez-Gonzalez, A., Willson, M., Wirnsberger, P., Fortunato, M., Alet, F., Ravuri, S., Ewalds, T., Eaton-Rosen, Z., Hu, W., Merose, A., Hoyer, S., Holland, G., Vinyals, O., Stott, J., Pritzel, A., Mohamed, S., and Battaglia, P.: Learning skillful medium-range global weather forecasting, Science, 382, 1416–1421, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adi2336, 2023.
Lang, S., Alexe, M., Chantry, M., Dramsch, J., Pinault, F., Raoult, B., Clare, M. C. A., Lessig, C., Maier-Gerber, M., Magnusson, L., Bouallègue, Z. B., Nemesio, A. P., Dueben, P. D., Brown, A., Pappenberger, F., and Rabier, F.: AIFS – ECMWF's data-driven forecasting system, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2406.01465, 7 August 2024.
Lees, T., Reece, S., Kratzert, F., Klotz, D., Gauch, M., De Bruijn, J., Kumar Sahu, R., Greve, P., Slater, L., and Dadson, S. J.: Hydrological concept formation inside long short-term memory (LSTM) networks, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 3079–3101, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-3079-2022, 2022.
Li, L., Carver, R., Lopez-Gomez, I., Sha, F., and Anderson, J.: Generative emulation of weather forecast ensembles with diffusion models, Sci. Adv., 10, eadk4489, https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adk4489, 2024.
Machac, D., Reichert, P., and Albert, C.: Emulation of dynamic simulators with application to hydrology, J. Comput. Phys., 313, 352–366, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2016.02.046, 2016.
Meyer, D., Grimmond, S., Dueben, P., Hogan, R., and Van Reeuwijk, M.: Machine Learning Emulation of Urban Land Surface Processes, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 14, e2021MS002744, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021MS002744, 2022.
Mironov, D. V.: Parameterization of lakes in numerical weather prediction: Description of a lake model, COSMO Technical Report, No. 11, Deutscher Weeerdienst, Offenbach am Main, Germany, 41 pp., 2008.
Muñoz-Sabater, J., Dutra, E., Agustí-Panareda, A., Albergel, C., Arduini, G., Balsamo, G., Boussetta, S., Choulga, M., Harrigan, S., Hersbach, H., Martens, B., Miralles, D. G., Piles, M., Rodríguez-Fernández, N. J., Zsoter, E., Buontempo, C., and Thépaut, J.-N.: ERA5-Land: a state-of-the-art global reanalysis dataset for land applications, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 4349–4383, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-4349-2021, 2021.
Nath, S., Lejeune, Q., Beusch, L., Seneviratne, S. I., and Schleussner, C.-F.: MESMER-M: an Earth system model emulator for spatially resolved monthly temperature, Earth Syst. Dynam., 13, 851–877, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-851-2022, 2022.
Nearing, G., Cohen, D., Dube, V., Gauch, M., Gilon, O., Harrigan, S., Hassidim, A., Klotz, D., Kratzert, F., Metzger, A., Nevo, S., Pappenberger, F., Prudhomme, C., Shalev, G., Shenzis, S., Tekalign, T. Y., Weitzner, D., and Matias, Y.: Global prediction of extreme floods in ungauged watersheds, Nature, 627, 559–563, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07145-1, 2024.
Owens, R. G. and Hewson, T. D.: ECMWF Forecast User Guide, ECMWF, Reading, https://doi.org/10.21957/m1cs7h, last access: 4 July 2024, 2018.
Ozaki, Y., Tanigaki, Y., Watanabe, S., Nomura, M., and Onishi, M.: Multiobjective Tree-Structured Parzen Estimator, J. Artif. Intell. Res., 73, 1209–1250, https://doi.org/10.1613/jair.1.13188, 2022.
Pappenberger, F., Ramos, M. H., Cloke, H. L., Wetterhall, F., Alfieri, L., Bogner, K., Mueller, A., and Salamon, P.: How do I know if my forecasts are better? Using benchmarks in hydrological ensemble prediction, J. Hydrol., 522, 697–713, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.01.024, 2015.
Popov, S., Morozov, S., and Babenko, A.: Neural Oblivious Decision Ensembles for Deep Learning on Tabular Data, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1909.06312, 19 September 2019.
Reichstein, M., Camps-Valls, G., Stevens, B., Jung, M., Denzler, J., Carvalhais, N., and Prabhat: Deep learning and process understanding for data-driven Earth system science, Nature, 566, 195–204, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-0912-1, 2019.
Sener, O. and Koltun, V.: Multi-Task Learning as Multi-Objective Optimization, arXiv [preprint], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1810.04650, 10 October 2018.
Shukla, J.: Dynamical Predictability of Monthly Means, J. Atmos. Sci., 38, 2547–2572, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1981)038<2547:DPOMM>2.0.CO;2, 1981.
Shwartz-Ziv, R. and Armon, A.: Tabular Data: Deep Learning is Not All You Need. Information Fusion, 81, 84–90, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2021.11.011, 2022.
Slater, L. J., Arnal, L., Boucher, M.-A., Chang, A. Y.-Y., Moulds, S., Murphy, C., Nearing, G., Shalev, G., Shen, C., Speight, L., Villarini, G., Wilby, R. L., Wood, A., and Zappa, M.: Hybrid forecasting: blending climate predictions with AI models, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 1865–1889, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-1865-2023, 2023.
Thorpe, A., Bauer, P., Magnusson, L., and Richardson, D.: An evaluation of recent performance of ECMWF's forecasts, ECMWF, https://doi.org/10.21957/HI1EEKTR, 2013.
Van Katwyk, P., Fox-Kemper, B., Seroussi, H., Nowicki, S., and Bergen, K. J.: A Variational LSTM Emulator of Sea Level Contribution From the Antarctic Ice Sheet, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 15, e2023MS003899, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023MS003899, 2023.
Viterbo, P.: Land_surface_processes [education material], Meteorological Training Course Lecture Series, ECMWF, 2002.
Wesselkamp, M., Chantry, M., Pinnington, E., Choulga, M., Boussetta, S., Kalweit, M., Boedecker, J., Dormann, C. F., Pappenberger, F., and Balsamo, G.: Advances in Land Surface Model-based Forecasting: A Comparison of LSTM, Gradient Boosting, and Feedforward Neural Networks as Prognostic State Emulators in a Case Study with ECLand, OSF [model code] https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/8567D, 2024a.
Wesselkamp, M., Chantry, M., Pinnington, E., Choulga, M., Boussetta, S., Kalweit, M., Boedecker, J., Dormann, C. F., Pappenberger, F., and Balsamo, G.: Advances in Land Surface Model-based Forecasting: A Comparison of LSTM, Gradient Boosting, and Feedforward Neural Networks as Prognostic State Emulators in a Case Study with ECLand. European and Global training and test data, ECMWF [data set], https://doi.org/10.21957/n17n-6a68, 2024b.
Wesselkamp, M., Chantry, M., Pinnington, E., Choulga, M., Boussetta, S., Kalweit, M., Boedecker, J., Dormann, C. F., Pappenberger, F., and Balsamo, G.: Advances in Land Surface Model-based Forecasting: A Comparison of LSTM, Gradient Boosting, and Feedforward Neural Networks as Prognostic State Emulators in a Case Study with ECLand. European and Global training and test data, ECMWF [data set], https://doi.org/10.21957/pcf3-ah06, 2024c.
Wesselkamp, M., Moser, N., Kalweit, M., Boedecker, J., and Dormann, C. F.: Process-Informed Neural Networks: A Hybrid Modelling Approach to Improve Predictive Performance and Inference of Neural Networks in Ecology and Beyond, Ecology Leeers, 27, e70012, https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.70012, 2024d.
Zwart, J. A., Oliver, S. K., Watkins, W. D., Sadler, J. M., Appling, A. P., Corson-Dosch, H. R., Jia, X., Kumar, V., and Read, J. S.: Near-term forecasts of stream temperature using deep learning and data assimilation in support of management decisions, J. Am. Water Resour. As., 59, 317–337, https://doi.org/10.1111/1752-1688.13093, 2023.
Short summary
We compared spatiotemporal forecasts of three machine learning models that learned water and energy
states on the land surface from a physical model scheme. The forecasting models were developed with reanalysis data and simulations on a European scale and transferred to the globe. We found that all approaches deliver highly accurate approximations of the physical dynamic at long time horizons, implying their usefulness to advance land surface forecasting with synthetic data.
states on the land surface from a physical model scheme. The forecasting models were developed with reanalysis data and simulations on a European scale and transferred to the globe. We found that all approaches deliver highly accurate approximations of the physical dynamic at long time horizons, implying their usefulness to advance land surface forecasting with synthetic data.
We compared spatiotemporal forecasts of three machine learning models that learned water and...
