Global evaluation of process-based models with in situ observations to detect long-term change in lake ice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Lake ice phenology has been used extensively to study the impacts of anthropogenic climate change, owing to the widespread occurrence of lake ice and the length of time series available for such studies. The proliferation of process-based lake models and gridded climate data have enabled the modeling of ice phenology across broad spatial scales, for example where lakes are not sampled. In this study, we used ice phenology outputs from an ensemble of lake-climate model projections to directly compare their performance with in situ data. Generally, we found that the lake models captured the range of variability of observational records (RMSE ice on = 22.9 days [4.7, 95.4]; RMSE ice off = 17.4 days [6.1, 76.5]), and particularly the long-term trends in temperate regions. However, the models performed poorly in extremely warm years or when there were rapid short-term changes in ice phenology. The location of the lakes, such as latitude and longitude, as well as lake morphology, such as lake depth and surface area, significantly influenced model performance. For example, the models performed best in shallow small lakes and worst in deep larger lakes. Our analysis suggests that the lake models tested can reliably estimate long-term trends in lake ice cover, particularly when averaged across large spatial scales, but widespread in situ observations are critical to capture extreme events.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".