Improving Land-Surface Model Simulations in Irrigated Areas by Incorporating Soil Moisture–Based Irrigation Estimates in Community Land Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Currently, land surface models (LSMs) are limited in representing realistic water and energy fluxes owing to the absence of reliable parameterization of irrigation. In this study, a novel method was employed to incorporate irrigation in the Community Land Model (CLM) Version 4.0. Two CLM experiments were set up, designated CLM-default run and CLM-irrigated run. The SM2RAIN algorithm was employed to reproduce the observed precipitation and irrigation using soil moisture (SM) information measured at the Fluxnet sites. The results showed that SM2RAIN reliably reproduced the observed precipitation on a daily timescale (R∼0.70 for all three sites) but significantly underestimated high-intensity precipitation (bias∼0.5 mm day−1 for all sites). The bias-corrected SM2RAIN output showed improved representation of observed daily precipitation (R=0.89 and 0.86) and monthly irrigation (R=0.89 and 0.96) at US-Ne1 and US-Ne2, respectively. The SM2RAIN estimated irrigation was input to CLM as independent forcing data along with other atmospheric forcings. The simulated surface energy fluxes from CLM were compared with eddy covariance–based flux tower observations. The results showed that CLM simulated energy fluxes from the CLM-irrigated run improved the representation of turbulent heat fluxes (latent and sensible). Overall, mean bias decreased by 32% and 64% for sensible and latent heat fluxes, respectively. This indicates that SM2RAIN-estimated irrigation is reliable input data for LSMs that potentially improved model representations of surface energy fluxes, which are important for comprehending the complex interactions between land surface and atmosphere in irrigated areas.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".