Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Huntzinger, Deborah

Publications and source records attributed to Huntzinger, Deborah.

Impacts of benchmarking choices on inferred model skill of the Arctic–Boreal terrestrial carbon cycle

Abstract Land surface models require continuous validation against observations to improve and reduce simulation uncertainty. However, inferred model performance can be heavily influenced by subjective choices made in the selection and application of observational data products. A key area often misrepresented by models is the Arctic–Boreal region, which is a potential tipping point region in Earth’s climate system due to large permafrost carbon stocks that are vulnerable to release with climate warming. We use the International Land Model Benchmarking (ILAMB) framework to evaluate how the model skill of TRENDY-v9 models varies based on the choice of observational-based benchmark and how benchmarks are applied in model evaluation. This analysis uses global datasets integrated into ILAMB and new, regionally-specific observational products from the Arctic–Boreal Vulnerability Experiment. Our results cover the overall time period of 1979–2019 and show that model scores can vary substantially depending on the data product applied, with higher model scores indicating better model performance against observations. The lowest model scores occur when benchmarked against regional, compared to global, datasets. We also evaluate observed and modeled functional relationships between ecosystem respiration and air temperature and between gross primary production and precipitation. Here, we find that the magnitude and shape of the responses are strongly impacted by the choice of observational dataset and the approach used to construct the functional relationship benchmark. These results suggest that model evaluation studies could conclude a false sense of model skill if only using a single benchmark data product or if not applying regional data products when performing a regional model analysis. Collectively, our findings highlight the influence of benchmarking choices on model evaluation and point to the need for benchmarking guidelines when assessing model skill.

Poe, Jeralyn (ORCID:0000000318495278)↗

AGU Publications Updates Authorship Policy to Foster Greater Equity and Transparency in Global Research Collaborations

AGU Publications encourages research collaborations between regions, countries, and communities. When well-resourced researchers complete research or field work in low-resourced settings while excluding local communities or researchers from the process, this can be referred to as parachute science or helicopter research. To help address concerns of parachute science and to promote greater equity and transparency in global research collaborations, AGU Publications has updated its authorship policy across its scholarly journals. The implementation of this policy follows a successful 18-month pilot at JGR: Biogeosciences. For research completed in low-resourced regions, authors are encouraged to include a disclosure statement pertaining to the ethical and scientific considerations of their research collaborations.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

Update on Our Action Plan for Equity, Inclusion, and Diversity in Publishing at JGR: Biogeosciences

We made a commitment to better include underrepresented members of our community in the publication pipeline of JGR: Biogeosciences. This commitment consists of regular updates on our policies and practices, and concrete actions we intend to implement over the next year. So far, our progress to tackle biases and ensure equitable research in the biogeosciences has focused on improving diversity of our associate editor and reviewer pools, increasing awareness of unconscious bias in peer-review, and promoting inclusion in global collaborations. In this update, we explore manuscript submissions and manuscript decisions by gender, and we present a pilot that aims to promote ethical and equitable global collaborations in resource-poor settings. Here, we end our editorial by presenting our next set of actions that we plan on completing over the next year, which include a more thorough analysis of reviewer demographics.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗