Land surface model photosynthesis and parameter calibration for boreal sites with adaptive population importance sampler
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. We calibrated the JSBACH model with six different stomatal conductance formulations using measurements from 10 FLUXNET coniferous evergreen sites in the Boreal zone. The parameter posterior distributions were generated by adaptive population importance sampler and the optimal values by a simple stochastic optimisation algorithm. The observations used to constrain the model are evapotranspiration (ET) and gross primary production (GPP). We identified the key parameters in the calibration process. These parameters control the soil moisture stress function and the overall rate of carbon fixation. We were able to improve the coefficient of determination and the model bias with all stomatal conductance formulations. There was no clear candidate for the best stomatal conductance model, although certain versions produced better estimates depending on the examined variable (ET, GPP) and the used metric. We were also able to significantly enhance the model behaviour during a drought event in a Finnish Scots pine forest site. The JSBACH model was also modified to use a delayed effect of temperature for photosynthetic activity. This modification enabled the model to correctly time and replicate the springtime increase in GPP (and ET) for conifers throughout the measurements sites used in this study.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".