SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS)”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2025

Hyporheic-zone Processes and Stream Oxygen Dynamics: Insights from a Multiscale Reactive Transport Model: Modeling Archive

This archive contains the data and Python scripts required to reproduce the analyses and figures in the study: Gomez-Velez, J. D., Rathore, S. S., Cohen, M. J., & Painter, S. L. (2025). Hyporheic-zone Processes and Stream Oxygen Dynamics: Insights from a Multiscale Reactive Transport Model. Submitted to Water Resources Research. The analysis utilizes the subgrid model Advection Dispersion Equation with Lagrangian Subgrids (ADELS) implemented in the Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS; https://amanzi.github.io/ats/stable/). In this case, the ATS and Amanzi versions are (1) ATS version 1.5.1_f5ba18f8 and (2) Amanzi version 1.6-dev_53444cca4. The repository includes a Jupyter Notebook and the necessary data (Pandas DataFrames stored as pickle files) to generate the figures for the manuscript. Additionally, it contains Python scripts to create ATS input files, run the ATS simulations, and post-process the results. Finally, it provides routines for parameter estimation using the Single-Station Metabolism (SSM) model with the Differential Evolution Adaptive Metropolis (DREAM) Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) algorithm with ZS enhancements (DREAM-ZS).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2026

Post-fire time series of sensor and geochemistry sample data from surface water, groundwater, precipitation, soil, and vegetation across Oak Creek watershed, Washington

This dataset supports a broader study examining wildfire impacts on hydrologic connectivity across 5 sites within the Oak Creek watershed and the resulting biogeochemical impacts. Stream sites were selected using the Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS) hydrologic model to identify locations with varying groundwater contributions and hydrologic responses across different burn severity scenarios. The Retreat Fire burned from July 23 to August 2 in 2024, affecting the five study sites at varying burn severities. Each site is equipped with YSI EXO2 sondes logging sub-hourly throughout the year, and grab samples are collected approximately every six weeks. YSI sondes are used to measure temporally resolved proxies for groundwater inputs (specific conductivity) and organic matter (fluorescent dissolved organic matter; fDOM) along with basic water quality and depth. Grab samples of surface water, groundwater, and precipitation are analyzed for water stable isotopes and conductivity to understand endmembers for hydrologic mixing Grab samples of surface water, groundwater, soil water, and litter/vegetation/soil leachates are analyzed for organic matter composition measured by Fourier-Transform Ion Cyclotron Resonance Mass Spectrometry (FTICR-MS) to understand organic matter dynamics. Game camera photos are provided in a separate data package available at https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/datasets/doi:10.15485/3018598. Future versions of this dataset will include time series data from YSI EXO2 sondes (fDOM, dissolved oxygen, temperature, depth, specific conductance, turbidity, pH), BaroTROLL sensors (air temperature and barometric pressure), rain gauges (precipitation), and data from the soil and vegetation samples. Because this study is ongoing, this data package will be updated regularly to include newly collected data and the additional data types. For details on how to navigate data packages generated by this project, see https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/portals/PNNLRiverCorridorSFA/About. In addition to a readme, this data package also includes a file-level metadata (FLMD) file that describes each file and a data dictionary (DD) that describes all column/row headers and variable definitions. This dataset is comprised of (1) a folder of field photos; (2) a folder of surface water sample data; (3) a folder of raw Fourier transform ion cyclotron resonance mass spectrometry (FTICR-MS) data; (4) a data checks report; (5) file-level metadata; (6) data dictionary; (7) field metadata; (8) readme; (9) international generic sample number (IGSN) mapping file; and (10) field protocols. The sample data subfolder contains (1) dissolved organic carbon (DOC, measured as non-purgeable organic carbon, NPOC) data and averages; (2) total dissolved nitrogen data and averages; (3) stable water isotopes and averages; (4) methods codes; (5) FTICR-MS methods; and (15) a subfolder of 9.4 Tesla (9.4T) FTICR-MS data. This folder contains the processed data and three subfolders, one containing the .xml files, one containing the water CoreMS output files, and the other containing instructions and scripts for processing the files in CoreMS (https://github.com/EMSL-Computing/CoreMS). All files are .csv, .pdf, .R, .xml, .d, .html, .Rmd, .py, .cal, .json, .jpg, .jpeg, .png, .mov, or .mp4.

Biogeochemistry↗

DOE OSTI2026

Post-fire time series photos from five sites across the Oak Creek watershed, Washington

Burn severity↗

DOE OSTI2026

Permafrost Thaw, Uneven Subsidence and Projected Drying of Ice-wedge Polygon Tundra: Modeling Archive

This dataset is a model archive of the paper Permafrost Thaw, Uneven Subsidence and Projected Drying of Ice-wedge Polygon Tundra (in prep) to support a modeling study investigating how projected increases in Arctic temperature and precipitation will jointly influence hydrologic conditions in ice-rich tundra landscapes. With this dataset, this study is to address the research question: Will Arctic tundra landscapes become wetter or drier with increasing precipitation and temperature in the future when thaw-induced ground subsidence and associated microtopographic evolution are represented? The simulations focus on ice-wedge polygon tundra, a widespread form of ice-rich permafrost terrain that is highly sensitive to thaw-driven landscape change. This dataset contains model input and output data for four study watersheds in Alaska: Anaktuvuk, Utqiagvik (formerly Barrow), Brooks Foothills, and Prudhoe Bay. Simulations were performed using the Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS, v1.5), a physics-rich integrated surface–subsurface hydrologic model. For each watershed, ten modeling cases were performed representing two landscape evolution conditions (with subsidence and without subsidence) combined with five climate forcing scenarios derived from Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP5, SSP5 with precipitation trend, SSP2, SSP2 with precipitation trend, and SSP2 with double precipitation trend). Particularly, for each watershed under the forcing SSP2 with precipitation trend, there are two additional simulations considering spatially heterogeneous subsidence distributions: one assumes randomly distributed scaling and the other includes elevation dependent distribution scaling. These simulations span 1980–2099 and include spin-up runs (1980–2009) followed by transient projections (2010–2099). To facilitate reproducibility of simulations, all datasets are organized by watershed. For each study watershed, the dataset contains: (1) Pre-partitioned mesh files for 32-core modeling (.par.32.XX), located in EACH_WATERSHED/mesh/basin; and also a non-partitioned mesh file (.exo) located in EACH_WATERSHED/mesh; (2) Climate forcings corresponding to the five SSP scenarios (.h5), located in EACH_WATERSHED/data; (3) Final states (.h5) from column spin-up modeling used to initialize historical watershed-scale spin-up runs from 1980 to 2009, located in EACH_WATERSHED/PreSpinupHistorical; (4) Final states (.h5) of historical watershed-scale spin-up runs from 1980 to 2009 used to initialize projection runs, located in EACH_WATERSHED/Spinup_daymetERA5; (5) ATS modeling input files (.xml), located in EACH_WATERSHED/EACH_SIMULATION_SCENARIO/inputfiles; (6) ATS modeling output files (.dat), located in in EACH_WATERSHED/EACH_SIMULATION_SCENARIO/combined_obs; (7) For the Brooks Foothills watershed, additional spatial model outputs are provided (.h5) for selected years (2033 and 2093) used to generate spatial figures in this study, located in Brooksfoothills/EACH_SIMULATION_SCENARIO/results-WITH/WITHOUT_SUBSIDENCE-year2033/2093. All data files with suffix .h5 can be accessible through Python h5py, and all data files with suffix of .dat can be imported by Python pandas. Mesh file with .exo can be visualized through Paraview or read by Python netCDF. The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments in the Arctic (NGEE Arctic) project is a research effort to reduce uncertainty in the Department of Energy’s Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) by developing a predictive understanding of Arctic tundra ecosystems underlain by permafrost and to quantify feedbacks from the Arctic tundra to the Earth system. NGEE Arctic is supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research. Over Phases 1–3, observations made by the NGEE Arctic team across a gradient of permafrost landscapes in Arctic Alaska improved the representation of tundra processes in the land surface component of E3SM (the E3SM Land Model, ELM). Model improvements emphasized unique aspects of permafrost environments and explored reductions in model complexity while retaining predictive power. The Arctic-informed ELM developed by NGEE Arctic has been used to make novel predictions on processes ranging from permafrost thaw to soil biogeochemical cycling to Earth system feedbacks associated with the unique characteristics of tundra plants. In Phase 4, the NGEE Arctic team is evaluating our new predictive understanding under novel conditions across the Arctic domain. In collaboration with partners at long-term pan-Arctic research sites we are examining whether an Arctic-informed ELM can faithfully simulate interactions among surface and subsurface processes at site, regional, and pan-Arctic scales. In turn, we are using variety of tools to dynamically extend and evaluate ELM inference, with an emphasis on data synthesis and pan-Arctic model evaluation, reintegration of code with an evolving E3SM, scaling across heterogeneous Arctic landscapes, and the appropriate representation of the impacts of increasingly frequent Arctic disturbances.

EARTH SCIENCE > ATMOSPHERE > PRECIPITATION↗

DOE OSTI2026

A bespoke model of Arctic river basins based on hillslope delineation: Model Archive

This dataset is a model archive of the paper A bespoke model of Arctic river basins based on hillslope delineation (in prep), which introduces a watershed decomposition and parameterization method for large scale permafrost hydrology simulation. With this dataset, this study aims to address the research question: whether a computationally efficient hillslope-based modeling framework can reliably simulate discharge at Arctic river-basin scales. This dataset contains model input and output data for five modeling scenarios at a study site located in the Sagavanirktok River basin. The five modeling scenarios include three modeling cases under temperate conditions using full 3D, decomposed 3D, and decomposed 2D modeling strategies; and two modeling cases under actual Arctic conditions with permafrost using full 3D and decomposed 2D modeling strategies. Simulations were performed using the Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS, v1.6 for three temperate scenarios and v1.5 for two Arctic scenarios), a physics-rich integrated surface–subsurface hydrologic model with cryo-hydrology features. For the three temperate models, simulations were conducted for the period of 10/01/1993 - 09/30/2002; and for the two Arctic models, simulations were conducted for the period of 01/01/1994 - 12/31/2002. To facilitate reproducibility of simulations, all datasets are organized hierarchically. The dataset contains: (1) Mesh files (.exo) for full 3D model, decomposed 3D models, and decomposed 2D models, located in huc/190604020802_gauge15906000/mesh/. Mesh files can be visualized through Paraview or read by Python. (2) Climate forcings (.h5) for full 3D model and decomposed 3D/2D models are located in huc/190604020802_gauge15906000/daymet_onePiece/, and huc/190604020802_gauge15906000/vp_pr_revised_daymet_1980_2006_with_wind/ separately. Accessible by Python. (3) Raw measured gage discharge (.csv) from USGS, located in huc/190604020802_gauge15906000/gaged_basin15906000_discharge_usgs/. Accessible by Python. (4) Delineated subdomain raster (.tif) and shape files (.shp), and the final parameterized results (.npy) for decomposed models, located in huc/190604020802_gauge15906000/data_preprocessed-meshing. Accessible by Python. (5) Temperate models are located in nonpermaf_huc190604020802_gauge15906000/, which includes three cases: decomposed 2D models (inside model_0*-hillslope_*), decomposed 3D models (inside model_1*-subcatchment_*), and full 3D model (inside model_2*-onepiece_*). Two step spin-up results (checkpoint_final.h5) are located in model_*1-*_spinup_steadystate and model_*2-*_spinup_cycle, separately, which are used to initialize real transient models. The input files (.xml) and output results (.dat) of the real transient models are located in model_*3-*_transient/. Especially, for two example hillslope models (ID=-11 and 11), additional h5py files are included in model_03-hillslope_transient/hillslope-11/, model_03-hillslope_transient/hillslope11, model_13-subcatchment_transient/subcatchment-11/, model_13-subcatchment_transient/subcatchment/11, respectively, which are used to plot the saturation figure (Figure 5) in the manuscript. Accessible by Python. (6) Arctic models are located in huc190604020802_gauge15906000/, which includes two cases: decomposed 2D models (inside model_04-hillslope_transient), and full 3D model (inside model_05-onepiece_transient_mannp1_ra). Three step spin-up results (checkpoint_final.h5) are located in model_01-column_freezeup/, model_02-column_spinup/, model_03-hillslope_spinup/, respectively, which are used to initialize real 2D transient hillslope models. The input files (.xml) and output results (.dat) of transient 2D hillslope models are located in model_04-hillslope_transient/. The input files (.xml) and output results (.dat) of the full 3D transient model is located in model_05-onepiece_transient_mannp1_ra/. The full 3D transient model is initialized by model_02-column_spinup/. Accessible by Python. (7) The MOSART routed discharge results (.csv) under Arctic conditions is located in huc190604020802_gauge15906000/MOSART/. Accessible by Python. (8) All Python codes (.py) used to parameterize full 3D model to decomposed 2D models are located in script/. These codes fit with watershed workflow (a watershed delineation tool) v1.4 under the branch gaob/v1.4 from https://github.com/gaobhub/watershed-workflow.git.

EARTH SCIENCE > CRYOSPHERE↗

DOE OSTI2026

Model data for infrastructure-aware simulation of compound flooding at Alligator Bayou Watershed, southeast Texas

This dataset supports infrastructure-aware hydrologic modeling and flood scenario analysis for the Alligator Bayou Watershed, a highly managed urban watershed in Southeast Texas. It includes Jupyter notebooks for figure reproduction, model configuration files, simulation outputs, and derived products used to quantify the influence of engineered stormwater infrastructure on flood behavior across multiple spatial scales. The dataset was generated using the Watershed Workflow Python package and the Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS), enabling integrated surface–subsurface hydrologic simulations on a channel-aligned mesh with explicit representations of pump stations, gate structures, detention basins, and impervious surfaces. Outputs include time series of gate and pump flows, stage observations, and water balance components, as well as spatially explicit fields of peak ponded depth and flood duration across multiple infrastructure scenarios spanning a single-location detention basin expansion, distributed drainage limitations, and compound coastal flooding. These data facilitate full reproducibility of the manuscript figures and support further research on urban flood dynamics and the role of stormwater infrastructure in shaping watershed-scale flood response.

EARTH SCIENCE > OCEANS > COASTAL PROCESSES↗

DOE OSTI2026

Model Data Archive for Manuscript Titled "Evaluation of a Coupled Surface–Subsurface Hydrologic Model Using Dense Water‑Level Sensors in a Mixed Urban–Rural Watershed"

This archive provides scripts, input files, and datasets used for the implementation and evaluation of a fully coupled surface–subsurface hydrologic model in the Neches River Basin, southeast Texas. The study uses the Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS) to simulate coupled surface–subsurface hydrologic processes over a mixed urban–rural watershed and evaluates model performance using a dense network of 136 in situ water-level sensors, nine U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) stream gauges, and SSEBop-derived evapotranspiration estimates during the period October 2014–June 2024. The workflow is implemented primarily in Python 3 using the Watershed Workflow package. The Jupyter notebooks can be executed using open-source software such as Anaconda JupyterLab or Visual Studio Code. Other data files include TXT, CSV, XML, SHP, TIF, NetCDF, HDF5, and ExodusII files, which can be processed using the provided Python scripts. ATS input files are provided in XML format and can be edited using any commonly used text editor. This archive contains: *Scripts and input files used to generate the ATS model setup, including watershed discretization, mesh generation, parameter mapping, and model configuration. *Jupyter notebooks used for preprocessing observational data, evaluating streamflow, water levels, and evapotranspiration, computing performance metrics, and generating the figures presented in the manuscript. *ATS simulation outputs and processed observational datasets, including OneRain and DD6 water-level sensors, USGS streamflow observations, GIS data, and supporting spatial datasets used throughout the study.

Dense water-level sensor network↗

DOE OSTI2026

Field and Model Data Associated with the Manuscript “Drivers of Streamflow Intermittency in Humid Regions: 2. Evaluating Controls on Flow Persistence in an Urbanized Catchment”

This package contains field data, modeling files, and scripts supporting the investigation of the drivers of streamflow intermittency in an urbanized catchment. It includes the field data collected from electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) surveys, distributed temperature sensing (DTS), continuous self-potential (SP) monitoring, groundwater and stilling well. In addition, it contains the data and results of the coupled water- and electrical-flow model developed using the COMSOL Multiphysics and Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS), as well as software files and Jupyter notebooks used to process the data and generate figures in the manuscript submitted for peer review. The data archive is organized in the following directories: 1) Climate Includes hourly precipitation and daily evapotranspiration time series (2024 – 2025) provided as CSV files, alongside a text file detailing dataset units. 2) Coupled_model Field_Application subfolder contains the ATS XML input scripts, data files, output data for the SP site. It also contains the Jupyter notebook (Plot_final_calib.ipynb) to visualize the results of the modeled SP, stream-groundwater exchange and moisture content. The flow model simulation is executed using the ATS XML scripts and the included Python script (generate_data_set.py) to convert ATS output to COMSOL-ready input. COMSOL Multiphysics template (.m can only be used with COMSOL with MATLAB) is executed using the ATS output data to simulate the potential field. 3) Discharge Includes the electrical conductivity (EC) time series (provided as CSV files) from salt slug injections. It also includes the Jupyter notebook (Discharge_process.ipynyb) used to estimate discharge. All discharge measurements collated into rating_curve_processed.csv 4) DTS Contains collated DTS data including raw Stokes and anti-Stokes measurement (provided as .h5 file). It also includes DTS processing.ipynb, a Jupyter notebook for calibrating the DTS data using dts_calibration Python package. cooler_calibration.csv is the DTS calibration CSV used in the calibration sequence. 5) ERT Contains raw resistivity data (provided as CSV files), spatial location of each of the electrodes (provided as CSV files), and files used for the resistivity inversion. 6) Slug_test Includes the slug test data at all the groundwater wells provided as CSV files, as well as the Jupyter notebook (Slug_test.ipynb) for calculating hydraulic conductivity. 7) SP Contains the SP data collected in field at the SP sites (provided as CSV files). 8) Well_data Contains two subfolders: 1) Raw, which provides unprocessed pressure, electrical conductivity and temperature timeseries downloaded from the loggers in all the groundwater and stilling wells, and 2) Processed, which contains sorted, QA/QC timeseries data for each well. The data archive also contains data_process.ipynb, a Jupyter notebook used for field data analysis and generating figures (plotting well, SP, climate, and discharge data, as well as calculating head gradient at sites with nested groundwater wells). Note: Code files (.ipynb, .py, .xml) can be opened in any standard code editor, .exo file can be viewed using Paraview, .h5 files can be opened using HDFView software and h5py Python package, and .resipy file can be opened with the open-source ResIPy software.

ATS↗

DOE OSTI2026

Field and Model Data Associated with the Manuscript “Drivers of Streamflow Intermittency in Humid Regions: 1. Evaluating Above- and Below-ground Controls of Flow Persistence in a Forested Catchment”

This package contains field data, modeling files, and scripts supporting the investigation of the drivers of streamflow intermittency in a forested catchment. It includes the field data collected from electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) surveys, ground penetrating radar (GPR), continuous self-potential (SP) monitoring, electromagnetic (EM) imaging, groundwater and stilling well. In addition, it contains the data and results of the coupled water- and electrical-flow model developed using the COMSOL Multiphysics and Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS), as well as software files and Jupyter notebooks used to process the data and generate figures in the manuscript submitted for peer review. The data archive is organized in the following directories: 1) Climate Includes hourly precipitation and daily evapotranspiration time series (2024 – 2025) provided as CSV files, alongside a text file detailing dataset units. 2) Coupled_model Contains two subfolders: Synthetic and Field_Application subfolder. Synthetic subfolder contains the ATS XML input script (can be opened using any code editor) for the four synthetic hydrological cases tested (Connected and gaining, Connected and losing, Disconnected and losing, and dry stream). It also includes other experimental cases to test the influence of precipitation and concentration gradient. For each synthetic case, the flow model simulation is executed using the ATS XML scripts and the included Python script (generate_data_set.py) to convert ATS output to COMSOL-ready input. COMSOL Multiphysics template (.mph can be opened with the commercial software COMSOL and requires a license) is executed using the ATS output data to simulate the potential field. It also includes the Synthetic_model_plot.ipynb (can be opened using any code editor) to visualize the SP result and generate manuscript figures. The data subfolder contains mesh files to run both the ATS (.exo and .stl files can be viewed using Paraview; .h5 files can be opened using HDFView software and h5py Python package) and COMSOL models. Field_Application subfolder contains two subfolders: ES_MDA_inversion and Final_Model. ES_MDA_inversion contains the Python script (.py can be opened using any code editor) and SP observation data used to run the Ensemble Smoother with Multiple Data Assimilation (ES-MDA) inversion sequence to get the optimal model parameters. The Final_model subfolder contains the ATS XML input scripts, data files, output data for the two SP sites. The same workflow steps outlined for the Synthetic subfolder apply here. It also contains the Jupyter notebook (Plot_final_calib.ipynb) to visualize the results of the modeled SP, stream-groundwater exchange and moisture content. 3) Discharge Includes the electrical conductivity (EC) time series (provided as CSV files) from salt slug injections. It also includes the Jupyter notebook (Discharge_process.ipynyb) used to estimate discharge. All discharge measurements collated into rating_curve_processed.csv 4) EM Contains the CSV file of the EM data from the DUALEM-42, including spatial coordinates (x, y, z), apparent conductivity, and in-phase measurements at 2 m coil separations for horizontal coplanar (HCP) and perpendicular (PRP) geometries. 5) ERT Contains raw resistivity data (provided as CSV files), spatial location of each of the electrodes (provided as CSV files), and files used for the resistivity inversion (.resipy can be opened with the open-source ResIPy software). 6) GPR Includes GPR field datasets collected at 100 MHz and 250 MHz antenna frequencies, along with the processing/interpretation project file (GPR_process.gpz can be viewed using EKKO_Project 6, a commercial software by Sensors & Software that requires a license). 7) Slug_test Includes the slug test data at all the groundwater wells provided as CSV files, as well as the Jupyter notebook (Slug_test.ipynb) for calculating hydraulic conductivity. 8) SP Contains the SP data collected in field at the two SP sites (one in the perennial reach and the other in the intermittent reach), provided as DAT files. 9) Well_data Contains two subfolders: 1) Raw, which provides unprocessed pressure, electrical conductivity and temperature timeseries downloaded from the loggers in all the groundwater and stilling wells, and 2) Processed, which contains sorted, QA/QC timeseries data for each well. The data archive also contains data_process.ipynb, a Jupyter notebook used for field data analysis and generating figures (plotting well, SP, climate, and discharge data, as well as calculating head gradient at sites with nested groundwater wells). It also includes DTW.ipynb, a Jupyter notebook containing the code for the dynamic time warping (DTW) with sliding window to evaluate SP signal synchronicity.

ATS↗

DOE OSTI2026

Runoff evaluation in an Earth System Land Model for permafrost regions in Alaska

Modeling of hydrological runoff is essential for accurately capturing spatiotemporal feedbacks within the land–atmosphere system, particularly in sensitive regions such as permafrost landscapes. However, substantial uncertainties persist in the terrestrial runoff parameterization schemes used in Earth system and land surface models. This is particularly true in permafrost regions, where landscape heterogeneity is high and reliable observational data are scarce. In this study, we evaluate the performance of runoff parameterization schemes in the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) land model (ELM). Our proposed framework leverages simulation results from the Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS), which is a physics-based integrated surface/subsurface hydrologic model that has been successfully evaluated previously in Arctic tundra regions. We used ATS to simulate runoff from 22 representative hillslopes in the Sagavanirktok River basin, located on the North Slope of Alaska, then compared the output with ELM's parameterized representation of total runoff. Results show that (1) ELM's total runoff was the same order of magnitude as the ATS simulations, and both models were similarly variable over time; (2) minor adjustments to coefficients in ELM's runoff parameterization improved the match between the ATS simulation and ELM's parameterized representation of annual and seasonal total runoff; (3) overall, runoff responses in ATS and ELM are more similar in flat hillslope environments compared to steep hillslopes; and (4) shallower active layer thicknesses and higher precipitation simulations resulted in lower correlations between the two models due to greater total runoff. By incorporating the optimized runoff coefficients from the Sagavanirktok River basin into ELM, the simulated total runoff better matched the streamflow observations at a small watershed located on the Seward Peninsula of Alaska. Our findings revealed important insights into the effectiveness of runoff parameterizations in land surface models and pathways for improving runoff coefficients in typical Arctic regions.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2022

The effects of spatial and temporal resolution of gridded meteorological forcing on watershed hydrological responses

Abstract. Meteorological forcing plays a critical role in accurately simulating the watershed hydrological cycle. With the advancement of high-performance computing and the development of integrated watershed models, simulating the watershed hydrological cycle at high temporal (hourly to daily) and spatial resolution (tens of meters) has become efficient and computationally affordable. These hyperresolution watershed models require high resolution of meteorological forcing as model input to ensure the fidelity and accuracy of simulated responses. In this study, we utilized the Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS), an integrated watershed model, to simulate surface and subsurface flow and land surface processes using unstructured meshes at the Coal Creek Watershed near Crested Butte (Colorado). We compared simulated watershed hydrologic responses including streamflow and distributed variables such as evapotranspiration, snow water equivalent (SWE), and groundwater table driven by three publicly available, gridded meteorological forcings (GMFs) – Daily Surface Weather and Climatological Summaries (Daymet), the Parameter-elevation Regressions on Independent Slopes Model (PRISM), and the North American Land Data Assimilation System (NLDAS). By comparing various spatial resolutions (ranging from 400 m to 4 km) of PRISM, the simulated streamflow only becomes marginally worse when spatial resolution of meteorological forcing is coarsened to 4 km (or 30 % of the watershed area). However, the 4 km-resolution has much worse performance than finer resolution in spatially distributed variables such as SWE. Using the temporally disaggregated PRISM, we compared models forced by different temporal resolutions (hourly to daily), and sub-daily resolution preserves the dynamic watershed responses (e.g., diurnal fluctuation of streamflow) that are absent in results forced by daily resolution. Conversely, the simulated streamflow shows better performance using daily resolution compared to that using sub-daily resolution. Our findings suggest that the choice of GMF and its spatiotemporal resolution depends on the quantity of interest and its spatial and temporal scale, which may have important implications for model calibration and watershed management decisions.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

Knowledge-informed deep learning for hydrological model calibration: an application to Coal Creek Watershed in Colorado

Abstract. Deep learning (DL)-assisted inverse mapping has shown promise in hydrological model calibration by directly estimating parameters from observations. However, the increasing computational demand for running the state-of-the-art hydrological model limits sufficient ensemble runs for its calibration. In this work, we present a novel knowledge-informed deep learning method that can efficiently conduct the calibration using a few hundred realizations. The method involves two steps. First, we determine decisive model parameters from a complete parameter set based on the mutual information (MI) between model responses and each parameter computed by a limited number of realizations (∼50). Second, we perform more ensemble runs (e.g., several hundred) to generate the training sets for the inverse mapping, which selects informative model responses for estimating each parameter using MI-based parameter sensitivity. We applied this new DL-based method to calibrate a process-based integrated hydrological model, the Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS), at Coal Creek Watershed, CO. The calibration is performed against observed stream discharge (Q) and remotely sensed evapotranspiration (ET) from the water year 2017 to 2019. Preliminary MI analysis on 50 realizations resulted in a down-selection of 7 out of 14 ATS model parameters. Then, we performed a complete MI analysis on 396 realizations and constructed the inverse mapping from informative responses to each of the selected parameters using a deep neural network. Compared with calibration using observations covering all time steps, the new inverse mapping improves parameter estimations, thus enhancing the performance of ATS forward model runs. The Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) of streamflow predictions increases from 0.53 to 0.8 when calibrating against Q alone. Using ET observations, on the other hand, does not show much improvement on the performance of ATS modeling mainly due to both the uncertainty of the remotely sensed product and the insufficient coverage of the model ET ensemble in capturing the observation. By using observed Q only, we further performed a multiyear analysis and show that Q is best simulated (NSE > 0.8) by including in the calibration the dry-year flow dynamics that show more sensitivity to subsurface characteristics than the other wet years. Moreover, when continuing the forward runs till the end of 2021, the calibrated models show similar simulation performances during this evaluation period as the calibration period, demonstrating the ability of the estimated parameters in capturing climate sensitivity. Our success highlights the importance of leveraging data-driven knowledge in DL-assisted hydrological model calibration.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2022

Evaluating simplifications of subsurface process representations for field-scale permafrost hydrology models

Abstract. Permafrost degradation within a warming climate poses a significant environmental threat through both the permafrost carbon feedback and damage to human communities and infrastructure. Understanding this threat relies on better understanding and numerical representation of thermo-hydrological permafrost processes and the subsequent accurate prediction of permafrost dynamics. All models include simplified assumptions, implying a tradeoff between model complexity and prediction accuracy. The main purpose of this work is to investigate this tradeoff when applying the following commonly made assumptions: (1) assuming equal density of ice and liquid water in frozen soil, (2) neglecting the effect of cryosuction in unsaturated freezing soil, and (3) neglecting advective heat transport during soil freezing and thaw. This study designed a set of 62 numerical experiments using the Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS v1.2) to evaluate the effects of these choices on permafrost hydrological outputs, including both integrated and pointwise quantities. Simulations were conducted under different climate conditions and soil properties from three different sites in both column- and hillslope-scale configurations. Results showed that amongst the three physical assumptions, soil cryosuction is the most crucial yet commonly ignored process. Neglecting cryosuction, on average, can cause 10 %–20 % error in predicting evaporation, 50 %–60 % error in discharge, 10 %–30 % error in thaw depth, and 10 %–30 % error in soil temperature at 1 m beneath the surface. The prediction error for subsurface temperature and water saturation is more obvious at hillslope scales due to the presence of lateral flux. By comparison, using equal ice–liquid density has a minor impact on most hydrological metrics of interest but significantly affects soil water saturation with an averaged 5 %–15 % error. Neglecting advective heat transport presents the least error, 5 % or even much lower, in most metrics of interest for a large-scale Arctic tundra system without apparent influence caused by localized groundwater flow, and it can decrease the simulation time at hillslope scales by 40 %–80 %. By challenging these commonly made assumptions, this work provides permafrost hydrology scientists an important context for understanding the underlying physical processes, including allowing modelers to better choose the appropriate process representation for a given modeling experiment.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2026

Model Data Archive Associated with Manuscript "Fire-altered Carbon Pools Create Disturbance Memory in Stream Dissolved Organic Carbon"

This data package supports the publication “Fire-altered Carbon Pools Create Disturbance Memory in Stream Dissolved Organic Carbon” by Li et al. (2026). The package contains processed model inputs, configuration files, restart files, simulation outputs, scripts, and visualization products used to evaluate post-fire dissolved organic carbon (DOC) dynamics in the Naches River Watershed, Washington, USA, following the 2021 Schneider Springs Fire. The modeling workflow couples ELM-BGC, the biogeochemistry-enabled Energy Exascale Earth System Model Land Model; ATS, the Advanced Terrestrial Simulator for integrated surface-subsurface hydrology; and PFLOTRAN, a reactive transport model for multicomponent aqueous geochemistry. Together, these models simulate how wildfire-induced changes in vegetation, litter, coarse woody debris, and soil organic matter influence DOC production, transport, and reaction from burned hillslopes to stream networks. The archive includes preprocessed meteorological, geospatial, hydrologic, and biogeochemical forcing data; ELM-BGC-derived DOC source terms; ATS mesh files; PFLOTRAN reactive-transport inputs; model configuration files; spin-up and transient restart files; watershed-scale diagnostic outputs; stream concentration time series; and figures or visualization files used to inspect and reproduce key results. File types include Hierarchical Data Format 5 (HDF5) files for gridded forcing and model-coupling data, model input and configuration files for ELM-BGC, ATS, and PFLOTRAN, restart and simulation-output files generated by the modeling workflow, tabular or time-series diagnostic outputs, scripts for post-processing and figure generation, and image or visualization products associated with the manuscript. Use of the package depends on the intended task. Re-running the simulations requires the relevant modeling software, including ELM-BGC, ATS, and PFLOTRAN as ATS's geochemical engine. Inspecting outputs and reproducing figures requires Python with scientific plotting libraries such as Matplotlib, and three-dimensional model outputs may be viewed with ParaView. Geographic information system files or maps may be inspected with ArcGIS Pro or comparable GIS software. The data package is intended to enable traceability, reuse, and partial reproduction of the coupled land-to-watershed hydro-biogeochemical modeling workflow used to test how wildfire disturbance affects terrestrial carbon pools and downstream DOC dynamics.

ATS↗

DOE OSTI2024

Data and scripts associated with the manuscript "A Hydrogeophysical Framework to Assess Infiltration During a Simulated Ecosystem-Scale Flooding Experiment”

This package contains the data and scripts used in "A hydrogeophysical framework to assess infiltration during a simulated ecosystem-scale flooding experiment" (Adebayo et al., 2023). The Geophysics folder contains two subfolders containing Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) and Electrical Resistivity Imaging (ERI) datasets acquired between August 23 and August 26, 2021. The GPR subfolder contains raw data (Tempest_Project.GPZ) and processed results using the Sensors and Software EKKO Project software. The ERI subfolder contains two additional subfolders named Static and Timelapse. The Static subfolder contains background resistivity datasets acquired before infiltration, both raw and inverted results using the ResIpy code. The Timelapse subfolder contains repeated resistivity datasets acquired during infiltration on two profiles, along with raw and inverted results using the ResIpy code. The Flow model folder contains ATS model simulation files. The Geophysics-informed subfolder contains simulation datasets for two profiles generated using information from the geophysics data. The National_database-informed subfolder contains simulation datasets for two profiles generated using information from a national soil database. Each subfolder contains initial simulation results, multiple ensembles, and final simulation files. The Sensitivity_analysis folder contains the observation files exported from the flow model, notebooks used in running the code, and sensitivity analysis results showing the sensitivity of different parameters over a 48-hour period. We used mutual information-based global sensitivity analysis for the sensitivity analysis, following Jiang et al., 2022. This study shows a novel approach that integrates geophysical data with hydrological modeling to understand subsurface flow during coastal flooding.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2024

Advancing process-based flood frequency analysis for assessing flood hazard and population flood exposure

Recent studies have showcased the use of process-based hydrological models with Stochastic Storm Transposition (SST) techniques to conduct Flood Frequency Analysis (FFA). This framework, referred hereby FFA-SST, has proved to be a robust strategy to estimate peak flows of specific annual exceedance probability (e.g., 100-year peak flow) that can reflect natural and anthropogenic disturbances, including changes in land use and meteorological patterns. With the objective of advancing the FFA-SST framework, this study presents for the first time the use of an Integrated Surface-Subsurface Hydrological Model (ISSHM) to conduct FFA-SST by extending the analysis from peak flow responses to flood extent, enabling a unique view and analysis of flood hazard and population flood exposure at the basin scale. As a proof-of-concept, we used the ISSHM, Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (Amanzi-ATS) model, and the SST model, RainyDay, to conduct FFA-SST by simulating the flood response to 5,000 annual synthetic storm events in a 2,227 $km^2$ Southeast Texas watershed. We demonstrate that ATS, without site-specific calibration, provides a robust process-based representation of peak flows, flood extent, streamflow, evapotranspiration, soil moisture content, and water storage changes. Our results and analyses, covering frequency curves up to a 500-year return period for peak flows, basin inundation fractions, and the number of people exposed to flooding, offer a unique perspective to analyze flood impacts across spatial scales. Overall, this study provides critical insights for flood risk management by extending the FFA-SST framework to include both flood hazard and population flood exposure analyses at the basin scale. Such an approach will empower stakeholders and disaster emergency agencies with a more comprehensive understanding of flood impacts across the entire basin domain, facilitating informed decision-making for flood risk assessment and management.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2024

Model data for Flood Frequency Analysis using Stochastic Storm Transposition and an Integrated Surface-Subsurface Hydrological Model

This archived provides scripts and input files used for the implementation of a novel approach to conduct process-based Flood Frequency Analysis using a Stochastic Storm Transposition (SST) and an Integrated Surface-Subsurface Hydrological Model (ISSHM). As a proof-of-concept, this study uses the ISSHM, Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (Amanzi-ATS) model, and the SST model, RainyDay, to conduct flood frequency analysis by simulating the flood response to 5,000 annual synthetic storm events in a ~2000 km2 Southeast Texas watershed.The Watershed Workflow package is implemented in Python3. The Jupyter notebooks can be executed through multiple open-source tools, for example, Anaconda Jupyter Lab, VS Studio Code, etc. Other data files include TXT, CSV, DAT, SBATCH, SHP, TIF, NetCDF, and HDF5 files, which can be read through Python scripts. The input files for the ATS model and RainyDay model have .XML and .SST extensions, respectively, and can be edited in any commonly used text editors.This archive contains:* Scripts and data files essential for generating the ATS model input. It uses the Watershed Workflow package to produce both mesh and ATS input files. * Jupyter notebooks designated for the ATS model evaluation, covering both long-term simulations and 40 rainfall-runoff events.* Input files required to simulate SST storm events using RainyDay.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2024

Modeling the Effects of Artificial Drainage on Agriculture-dominated Watersheds using a Fully Distributed Integrated Hydrology Model: Datasets, scripts, model files

This model-data archive supports the research paper that demonstrates the integration of agricultural drainage features—specifically, narrow engineered ditches and tile drains—into a fully distributed, basin-scale integrated surface-subsurface hydrology model (ISSHM), Amanzi-ATS. The model employs innovative computational meshes aligned with agricultural ditches and incorporates the physically based Hooghoudt's drainage equation to simulate tile drainage, offering a novel strategy that enhances the accuracy of hydrological simulations.The archived dataset includes input parameters, model configurations, and select simulation outputs for the Amanzi-ATS model that successfully captured the streamflow patterns in the Portage River Watershed as validated by USGS gauge readings. Jupyter notebook for the preparation of model inputs and post-processing of outputs are also included. The model's predictive performance achieved a normalized Kling-Gupta Efficiency (KGE) of 0.81, surpassing SWAT without the necessity for site-specific calibration.The Amanzi-ATS model presented in this modeL-data archive allows for numerical experiments to explore the shifts in the flow structure under different drainage scenarios. As a tool for advancing the understanding of distributed hydrological responses and nutrient cycling, this archived model provides valuable insights for researchers, modelers, and decision-makers involved in watershed management and environmental modeling.The Watershed Workflow package is implemented in Python3. The Jupyter notebooks can be executed through multiple open-source tools, for example, Anaconda Jupyter Lab, VS Studio Code, etc. Other data files include CSV and HDF5 files, which can be read through Python scripts. The input files for the ATS model, open-source integrated hydrology, and transport model, are in XML format and can be edited in any commonly used text editors.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗