Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Ensemble model”

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.

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

At least 73 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2014

Water Balance in the Amazon Basin from a Land Surface Model Ensemble

Despite recent advances in land surfacemodeling and remote sensing, estimates of the global water budget are still fairly uncertain. This study aims to evaluate the water budget of the Amazon basin based on several state-ofthe- art land surface model (LSM) outputs. Water budget variables (terrestrial water storage TWS, evapotranspiration ET, surface runoff R, and base flow B) are evaluated at the basin scale using both remote sensing and in situ data. Meteorological forcings at a 3-hourly time step and 18 spatial resolution were used to run 14 LSMs. Precipitation datasets that have been rescaled to matchmonthly Global Precipitation Climatology Project (GPCP) andGlobal Precipitation Climatology Centre (GPCC) datasets and the daily Hydrologie du Bassin de l'Amazone (HYBAM) dataset were used to perform three experiments. The Hydrological Modeling and Analysis Platform (HyMAP) river routing scheme was forced with R and B and simulated discharges are compared against observations at 165 gauges. Simulated ET and TWS are compared against FLUXNET and MOD16A2 evapotranspiration datasets andGravity Recovery and ClimateExperiment (GRACE)TWSestimates in two subcatchments of main tributaries (Madeira and Negro Rivers).At the basin scale, simulated ET ranges from 2.39 to 3.26 mm day(exp -1) and a low spatial correlation between ET and precipitation indicates that evapotranspiration does not depend on water availability over most of the basin. Results also show that other simulated water budget components vary significantly as a function of both the LSM and precipitation dataset, but simulated TWS generally agrees with GRACE estimates at the basin scale. The best water budget simulations resulted from experiments using HYBAM, mostly explained by a denser rainfall gauge network and the rescaling at a finer temporal scale.

GPCP↗
NASA NTRS2023

Insights on the Vulnerability of Antarctic Glaciers From the ISMIP6 Ice Sheet Model Ensemble and Associated Uncertainty

The Antarctic Ice Sheet represents the largest source of uncertainty in future sea level rise projections, with a contribution to sea level by 2100 ranging from −5 to 43 cm of sea level equivalent under high carbon emission scenarios estimated by the recent Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison for CMIP6 (ISMIP6). ISMIP6 highlighted the different behaviors of the East and West Antarctic ice sheets, as well as the possible role of increased surface mass balance in offsetting the dynamic ice loss in response to changing oceanic conditions in ice shelf cavities. However, the detailed contribution of individual glaciers, as well as the partitioning of uncertainty associated with this ensemble, have not yet been investigated. Here, we analyze the ISMIP6 results for high carbon emission scenarios, focusing on key glaciers around the Antarctic Ice Sheet, and we quantify their projected dynamic mass loss, defined here as mass loss through increased ice discharge into the ocean in response to changing oceanic conditions. We highlight glaciers contributing the most to sea level rise, as well as their vulnerability to changes in oceanic conditions. We then investigate the different sources of uncertainty and their relative role in projections, for the entire continent and for key individual glaciers. We show that, in addition to Thwaites and Pine Island glaciers in West Antarctica, Totten and Moscow University glaciers in East Antarctica present comparable future dynamic mass loss and high sensitivity to ice shelf basal melt. The overall uncertainty in additional dynamic mass loss in response to changing oceanic conditions, compared to a scenario with constant oceanic conditions, is dominated by the choice of ice sheet model, accounting for 52 % of the total uncertainty of the Antarctic dynamic mass loss in 2100. Its relative role for the most dynamic glaciers varies between 14 % for MacAyeal and Whillans ice streams and 56 % for Pine Island Glacier at the end of the century. The uncertainty associated with the choice of climate model increases over time and reaches 13 % of the uncertainty by 2100 for the Antarctic Ice Sheet but varies between 4 % for Thwaites Glacier and 53 % for Whillans Ice Stream. The uncertainty associated with the ice–climate interaction, which captures different treatments of oceanic forcings such as the choice of melt parameterization, its calibration, and simulated ice shelf geometries, accounts for 22 % of the uncertainty at the ice sheet scale but reaches 36 % and 39 % for Institute Ice Stream and Thwaites Glacier, respectively, by 2100. Overall, this study helps inform future research by highlighting the sectors of the ice sheet most vulnerable to oceanic warming over the 21st century and by quantifying the main sources of uncertainty.

Hélène Seroussi↗
DOE OSTI2023

Insights into the vulnerability of Antarctic glaciers from the ISMIP6 ice sheet model ensemble and associated uncertainty

Abstract. The Antarctic Ice Sheet represents the largest source of uncertainty in future sea level rise projections, with a contribution to sea level by 2100 ranging from −5 to 43 cm of sea level equivalent under high carbon emission scenarios estimated by the recent Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison for CMIP6 (ISMIP6). ISMIP6 highlighted the different behaviors of the East and West Antarctic ice sheets, as well as the possible role of increased surface mass balance in offsetting the dynamic ice loss in response to changing oceanic conditions in ice shelf cavities. However, the detailed contribution of individual glaciers, as well as the partitioning of uncertainty associated with this ensemble, have not yet been investigated. Here, we analyze the ISMIP6 results for high carbon emission scenarios, focusing on key glaciers around the Antarctic Ice Sheet, and we quantify their projected dynamic mass loss, defined here as mass loss through increased ice discharge into the ocean in response to changing oceanic conditions. We highlight glaciers contributing the most to sea level rise, as well as their vulnerability to changes in oceanic conditions. We then investigate the different sources of uncertainty and their relative role in projections, for the entire continent and for key individual glaciers. We show that, in addition to Thwaites and Pine Island glaciers in West Antarctica, Totten and Moscow University glaciers in East Antarctica present comparable future dynamic mass loss and high sensitivity to ice shelf basal melt. The overall uncertainty in additional dynamic mass loss in response to changing oceanic conditions, compared to a scenario with constant oceanic conditions, is dominated by the choice of ice sheet model, accounting for 52 % of the total uncertainty of the Antarctic dynamic mass loss in 2100. Its relative role for the most dynamic glaciers varies between 14 % for MacAyeal and Whillans ice streams and 56 % for Pine Island Glacier at the end of the century. The uncertainty associated with the choice of climate model increases over time and reaches 13 % of the uncertainty by 2100 for the Antarctic Ice Sheet but varies between 4 % for Thwaites Glacier and 53 % for Whillans Ice Stream. The uncertainty associated with the ice–climate interaction, which captures different treatments of oceanic forcings such as the choice of melt parameterization, its calibration, and simulated ice shelf geometries, accounts for 22 % of the uncertainty at the ice sheet scale but reaches 36 % and 39 % for Institute Ice Stream and Thwaites Glacier, respectively, by 2100. Overall, this study helps inform future research by highlighting the sectors of the ice sheet most vulnerable to oceanic warming over the 21st century and by quantifying the main sources of uncertainty.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Ensemble modeling of global lake evaporation under climate change

Global projections of lake evaporation are typically based on simulations using single mechanistic models. However, because of its complex interactions with various lake physical properties, environmental and anthropogenic drivers, lake evaporation is highly variable and sensitive to the choice of model used. In this study, we present a multi-model analysis to investigate differences across global simulations of lake evaporation during the warm-season using three different lake models driven by outputs from four general circulation models (GCM) (i.e. 12 model combinations in total) for historic and future scenarios. Our results suggest substantial differences among lake-climate model simulations of lake evaporation. These differences varied throughout the 20th and 21st century, with model driver data explaining 74% of the variance in future projections of warm- season lake evaporation. Our projections indicate that, by the end of the 21st century (2070–2099), global annual lake evaporation rates will increase by 10–27% under Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) 2.6–8.5. Finally, we highlight the importance of using a multi-model approach for the prediction of future global lake evaporation responses to climate change.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Ensemble models for circuit topology estimation, fault detection and classification in distribution systems

This paper presents a methodology for simultaneous fault detection, classification, and topology estimation for adaptive protection of distribution systems. The methodology estimates the probability of the occurrence of each one of these events by using a hybrid structure that combines three sub-systems, a convolutional neural network for topology estimation, a fault detection based on predictive residual analysis, and a standard support vector machine with probabilistic output for fault classification. The input to all these sub-systems is the local voltage and current measurements. A convolutional neural network uses these local measurements in the form of sequential data to extract features and estimate the topology conditions. The fault detector is constructed with a Bayesian stage (a multitask Gaussian process) that computes a predictive distribution (assumed to be Gaussian) of the residuals using the input. Since the distribution is known, these residuals can be transformed into a Standard distribution, whose values are then introduced into a one-class support vector machine. The structure allows using a one-class support vector machine without parameter cross-validation, so the fault detector is fully unsupervised. Finally, a support vector machine uses the input to perform the classification of the fault types. All three sub-systems can work in a parallel setup for both performance and computation efficiency. In conclusion, we test all three sub-systems included in the structure on a modified IEEE123 bus system, and we compare and evaluate the results with standard approaches.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗