Moving Land Models Toward More Actionable Science: A Novel Application of the Community Terrestrial Systems Model Across Alaska and the Yukon River Basin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Arctic hydrological system is an interconnected system that is experiencing rapid change. It is comprised of permafrost, snow, glacier, frozen soils, and inland river systems. In this study, we aim to lower the barrier of using complex land models in regional applications by developing a generalizable optimization methodology and workflow for the Community Terrestrial Systems Model (CTSM), to move them toward a more Actionable Science paradigm. Further end‐user engagement is required to make science such as this “fully actionable.” We applied CTSM across Alaska and the Yukon River Basin at 4‐km spatial resolution. We highlighted several potentially useful high‐resolution CTSM configuration changes. Additionally, we performed a multi‐objective optimization using snow and river flow metrics within an adaptive surrogate‐based model optimization scheme. Four representative river basins across our study domain were selected for optimization based on observed streamflow and snow water equivalent observations at 10 SNOTEL sites. Fourteen sensitive parameters were identified for optimization with half of them not directly related to hydrology or snow processes. Across fifteen out‐of‐sample river basins, 13 had improved flow simulations after optimization and the mean Kling‐Gupta Efficiency of daily flow increased from 0.43 to 0.63 in a 30‐year evaluation. In addition, we adapted the Shapley Decomposition to disentangle each parameter's contribution to streamflow performance changes, with the seven non‐hydrological parameters providing a non‐negligible contribution to performance gains. The snow simulation had limited improvement, likely because snow simulation is influenced more by meteorological forcing than model parameter choices.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".