Evaluating Vegetation Modeling in Earth System Models with Machine Learning Approaches

Vegetation Gross Primary Productivity (GPP) is the single largest carbon flux of the terrestrial biosphere which, in turn, is responsible for sequestering $25-30\%$ of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions. The ability to model GPP is therefore critical for calculating carbon budgets as well as und...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Swaminathan, Ranjini, Quaife, Tristan, Allan, Richard Philip
Format: Other/Unknown Material
Language:unknown
Published: Authorea, Inc. 2023
Subjects:
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.22541/essoar.170049918.89868321/v1
id crwinnower:10.22541/essoar.170049918.89868321/v1
record_format openpolar
spelling crwinnower:10.22541/essoar.170049918.89868321/v1 2024-06-02T08:02:23+00:00 Evaluating Vegetation Modeling in Earth System Models with Machine Learning Approaches Swaminathan, Ranjini Quaife, Tristan Allan, Richard Philip 2023 http://dx.doi.org/10.22541/essoar.170049918.89868321/v1 unknown Authorea, Inc. posted-content 2023 crwinnower https://doi.org/10.22541/essoar.170049918.89868321/v1 2024-05-07T14:19:27Z Vegetation Gross Primary Productivity (GPP) is the single largest carbon flux of the terrestrial biosphere which, in turn, is responsible for sequestering $25-30\%$ of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions. The ability to model GPP is therefore critical for calculating carbon budgets as well as understanding climate feedbacks. Earth System Models (ESMs) have the capability to simulate GPP but vary greatly in their individual estimates, resulting in large uncertainties. We describe a Machine Learning (ML) approach to investigate two key factors responsible for differences in simulated GPP quantities from ESMs: the relative importance of different atmospheric drivers and differences in the representation of land surface processes. We describe the different steps in the development of our interpretable Machine Learning (ML) framework including the choice of algorithms, parameter tuning, training and evaluation. Our results show that ESMs largely agree on the physical climate drivers responsible for GPP as seen in the literature, for instance drought variables in the Mediterranean region or radiation and temperature in the Arctic region. However differences do exist since models don’t necessarily agree on which individual variable is most relevant for GPP. We also explore a distance measure to attribute GPP differences to climate influences versus process differences and provide examples for where our methods work (South Asia, Mediterranean)and where they are inconclusive (Eastern North America). Other/Unknown Material Arctic The Winnower Arctic
institution Open Polar
collection The Winnower
op_collection_id crwinnower
language unknown
description Vegetation Gross Primary Productivity (GPP) is the single largest carbon flux of the terrestrial biosphere which, in turn, is responsible for sequestering $25-30\%$ of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions. The ability to model GPP is therefore critical for calculating carbon budgets as well as understanding climate feedbacks. Earth System Models (ESMs) have the capability to simulate GPP but vary greatly in their individual estimates, resulting in large uncertainties. We describe a Machine Learning (ML) approach to investigate two key factors responsible for differences in simulated GPP quantities from ESMs: the relative importance of different atmospheric drivers and differences in the representation of land surface processes. We describe the different steps in the development of our interpretable Machine Learning (ML) framework including the choice of algorithms, parameter tuning, training and evaluation. Our results show that ESMs largely agree on the physical climate drivers responsible for GPP as seen in the literature, for instance drought variables in the Mediterranean region or radiation and temperature in the Arctic region. However differences do exist since models don’t necessarily agree on which individual variable is most relevant for GPP. We also explore a distance measure to attribute GPP differences to climate influences versus process differences and provide examples for where our methods work (South Asia, Mediterranean)and where they are inconclusive (Eastern North America).
format Other/Unknown Material
author Swaminathan, Ranjini
Quaife, Tristan
Allan, Richard Philip
spellingShingle Swaminathan, Ranjini
Quaife, Tristan
Allan, Richard Philip
Evaluating Vegetation Modeling in Earth System Models with Machine Learning Approaches
author_facet Swaminathan, Ranjini
Quaife, Tristan
Allan, Richard Philip
author_sort Swaminathan, Ranjini
title Evaluating Vegetation Modeling in Earth System Models with Machine Learning Approaches
title_short Evaluating Vegetation Modeling in Earth System Models with Machine Learning Approaches
title_full Evaluating Vegetation Modeling in Earth System Models with Machine Learning Approaches
title_fullStr Evaluating Vegetation Modeling in Earth System Models with Machine Learning Approaches
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating Vegetation Modeling in Earth System Models with Machine Learning Approaches
title_sort evaluating vegetation modeling in earth system models with machine learning approaches
publisher Authorea, Inc.
publishDate 2023
url http://dx.doi.org/10.22541/essoar.170049918.89868321/v1
geographic Arctic
geographic_facet Arctic
genre Arctic
genre_facet Arctic
op_doi https://doi.org/10.22541/essoar.170049918.89868321/v1
_version_ 1800746888018788352