DOE PAGES title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Land surface model parameter optimisation using in situ flux data: comparison of gradient-based versus random search algorithms (a case study using ORCHIDEE v1.9.5.2)

Abstract

Land surface models (LSMs), which form the land component of earth system models, rely on numerous processes for describing carbon, water and energy budgets, often associated with highly uncertain parameters. Data assimilation (DA) is a useful approach for optimising the most critical parameters in order to improve model accuracy and refine future climate predictions. In this study, we compare two different DA methods for optimising the parameters of seven plant functional types (PFTs) of the ORCHIDEE LSM using daily averaged eddy-covariance observations of net ecosystem exchange and latent heat flux at 78 sites across the globe. We perform a technical investigation of two classes of minimisation methods – local gradient-based (the L-BFGS-B algorithm, limited memory Broyden–Fletcher–Goldfarb–Shanno algorithm with bound constraints) and global random search (the genetic algorithm) – by evaluating their relative performance in terms of the model–data fit and the difference in retrieved parameter values. We examine the performance of each method for two cases: when optimising parameters at each site independently (“single-site” approach) and when simultaneously optimising the model at all sites for a given PFT using a common set of parameters (“multi-site” approach). We find that for the single site case the random search algorithm results inmore » lower values of the cost function (i.e. lower model–data root mean square differences) than the gradient-based method; the difference between the two methods is smaller for the multi-site optimisation due to a smoothing of the cost function shape with a greater number of observations. The spread of the cost function, when performing the same tests with 16 random first-guess parameters, is much larger with the gradient-based method, due to the higher likelihood of being trapped in local minima. When using pseudo-observation tests, the genetic algorithm results in a closer approximation of the true posterior parameter value in the L-BFGS-B algorithm. We demonstrate the advantages and challenges of different DA techniques and provide some advice on using it for the LSM parameter optimisation.« less

Authors:
 [1]; ORCiD logo [2];  [3];  [4]; ORCiD logo [5];  [4]
  1. Commissariat a l'Energie Atomique et aux Energies Alternatives (CEA-Saclay), Gif-sur-Yvette (France). Climate and Environmental Sciences Lab.; Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS), Ekaterinburg (Russian Federation). Inst. of Industrial Ecology
  2. Commissariat a l'Energie Atomique et aux Energies Alternatives (CEA-Saclay), Gif-sur-Yvette (France). Climate and Environmental Sciences Lab.; Univ. of Arizona, Tucson, AZ (United States)
  3. Noveltis, Labège (France)
  4. Commissariat a l'Energie Atomique et aux Energies Alternatives (CEA-Saclay), Gif-sur-Yvette (France). Climate and Environmental Sciences Lab.
  5. Univ. of Aberdeen (United Kingdom)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Oregon State Univ., Corvallis, OR (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE Office of Science (SC), Biological and Environmental Research (BER); National Science Foundation (NSF)
OSTI Identifier:
1609581
Grant/Contract Number:  
FG02-04ER63911; FG02-04ER63917
Resource Type:
Accepted Manuscript
Journal Name:
Geoscientific Model Development (Online)
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Name: Geoscientific Model Development (Online); Journal Volume: 11; Journal Issue: 12; Journal ID: ISSN 1991-9603
Publisher:
European Geosciences Union
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
58 GEOSCIENCES; Geology

Citation Formats

Bastrikov, Vladislav, MacBean, Natasha, Bacour, Cédric, Santaren, Diego, Kuppel, Sylvain, and Peylin, Philippe. Land surface model parameter optimisation using in situ flux data: comparison of gradient-based versus random search algorithms (a case study using ORCHIDEE v1.9.5.2). United States: N. p., 2018. Web. doi:10.5194/gmd-11-4739-2018.
Bastrikov, Vladislav, MacBean, Natasha, Bacour, Cédric, Santaren, Diego, Kuppel, Sylvain, & Peylin, Philippe. Land surface model parameter optimisation using in situ flux data: comparison of gradient-based versus random search algorithms (a case study using ORCHIDEE v1.9.5.2). United States. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-4739-2018
Bastrikov, Vladislav, MacBean, Natasha, Bacour, Cédric, Santaren, Diego, Kuppel, Sylvain, and Peylin, Philippe. Fri . "Land surface model parameter optimisation using in situ flux data: comparison of gradient-based versus random search algorithms (a case study using ORCHIDEE v1.9.5.2)". United States. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-4739-2018. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1609581.
@article{osti_1609581,
title = {Land surface model parameter optimisation using in situ flux data: comparison of gradient-based versus random search algorithms (a case study using ORCHIDEE v1.9.5.2)},
author = {Bastrikov, Vladislav and MacBean, Natasha and Bacour, Cédric and Santaren, Diego and Kuppel, Sylvain and Peylin, Philippe},
abstractNote = {Land surface models (LSMs), which form the land component of earth system models, rely on numerous processes for describing carbon, water and energy budgets, often associated with highly uncertain parameters. Data assimilation (DA) is a useful approach for optimising the most critical parameters in order to improve model accuracy and refine future climate predictions. In this study, we compare two different DA methods for optimising the parameters of seven plant functional types (PFTs) of the ORCHIDEE LSM using daily averaged eddy-covariance observations of net ecosystem exchange and latent heat flux at 78 sites across the globe. We perform a technical investigation of two classes of minimisation methods – local gradient-based (the L-BFGS-B algorithm, limited memory Broyden–Fletcher–Goldfarb–Shanno algorithm with bound constraints) and global random search (the genetic algorithm) – by evaluating their relative performance in terms of the model–data fit and the difference in retrieved parameter values. We examine the performance of each method for two cases: when optimising parameters at each site independently (“single-site” approach) and when simultaneously optimising the model at all sites for a given PFT using a common set of parameters (“multi-site” approach). We find that for the single site case the random search algorithm results in lower values of the cost function (i.e. lower model–data root mean square differences) than the gradient-based method; the difference between the two methods is smaller for the multi-site optimisation due to a smoothing of the cost function shape with a greater number of observations. The spread of the cost function, when performing the same tests with 16 random first-guess parameters, is much larger with the gradient-based method, due to the higher likelihood of being trapped in local minima. When using pseudo-observation tests, the genetic algorithm results in a closer approximation of the true posterior parameter value in the L-BFGS-B algorithm. We demonstrate the advantages and challenges of different DA techniques and provide some advice on using it for the LSM parameter optimisation.},
doi = {10.5194/gmd-11-4739-2018},
journal = {Geoscientific Model Development (Online)},
number = 12,
volume = 11,
place = {United States},
year = {Fri Nov 30 00:00:00 EST 2018},
month = {Fri Nov 30 00:00:00 EST 2018}
}

Journal Article:
Free Publicly Available Full Text
Publisher's Version of Record

Citation Metrics:
Cited by: 17 works
Citation information provided by
Web of Science

Save / Share:

Works referenced in this record:

The REFLEX project: Comparing different algorithms and implementations for the inversion of a terrestrial ecosystem model against eddy covariance data
journal, October 2009


Generating efficient derivative code with TAF
journal, October 2005


Climate change projections using the IPSL-CM5 Earth System Model: from CMIP3 to CMIP5
journal, February 2013


Constraining a land-surface model with multiple observations by application of the MPI-Carbon Cycle Data Assimilation System V1.0
journal, January 2016

  • Schürmann, Gregor J.; Kaminski, Thomas; Köstler, Christoph
  • Geoscientific Model Development, Vol. 9, Issue 9
  • DOI: 10.5194/gmd-9-2999-2016

Conditions for successful data assimilation: CONDITIONS FOR DATA ASSIMILATION
journal, October 2013

  • Chorin, Alexandre J.; Morzfeld, Matthias
  • Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, Vol. 118, Issue 20
  • DOI: 10.1002/2013JD019838

Estimation of Community Land Model parameters for an improved assessment of net carbon fluxes at European sites: Estimation of CLM Parameters
journal, March 2017

  • Post, Hanna; Vrugt, Jasper A.; Fox, Andrew
  • Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences, Vol. 122, Issue 3
  • DOI: 10.1002/2015JG003297

Uncertainties in CMIP5 Climate Projections due to Carbon Cycle Feedbacks
journal, January 2014

  • Friedlingstein, Pierre; Meinshausen, Malte; Arora, Vivek K.
  • Journal of Climate, Vol. 27, Issue 2
  • DOI: 10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00579.1

Correcting eddy-covariance flux underestimates over a grassland
journal, June 2000


Using satellite data to improve the leaf phenology of a global terrestrial biosphere model
journal, January 2015


Factorial Sampling Plans for Preliminary Computational Experiments
journal, May 1991


A Limited Memory Algorithm for Bound Constrained Optimization
journal, September 1995

  • Byrd, Richard H.; Lu, Peihuang; Nocedal, Jorge
  • SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, Vol. 16, Issue 5
  • DOI: 10.1137/0916069

On improving the communication between models and data: Communication between models and data
journal, January 2013

  • Dietze, Michael C.; Lebauer, David S.; Kooper, Rob
  • Plant, Cell & Environment, Vol. 36, Issue 9
  • DOI: 10.1111/pce.12043

Toward more realistic projections of soil carbon dynamics by Earth system models: SOIL CARBON MODELING
journal, January 2016

  • Luo, Yiqi; Ahlström, Anders; Allison, Steven D.
  • Global Biogeochemical Cycles, Vol. 30, Issue 1
  • DOI: 10.1002/2015GB005239

Recent trends and drivers of regional sources and sinks of carbon dioxide
journal, January 2015


OptIC project: An intercomparison of optimization techniques for parameter estimation in terrestrial biogeochemical models
journal, January 2007

  • Trudinger, Cathy M.; Raupach, Michael R.; Rayner, Peter J.
  • Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 112, Issue G2
  • DOI: 10.1029/2006JG000367

Bayesian calibration of process-based forest models: bridging the gap between models and data
journal, July 2005


Filling the gaps in meteorological continuous data measured at FLUXNET sites with ERA-Interim reanalysis
journal, January 2015


Joint assimilation of eddy covariance flux measurements and FAPAR products over temperate forests within a process‐oriented biosphere model
journal, September 2015

  • Bacour, C.; Peylin, P.; MacBean, N.
  • Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences, Vol. 120, Issue 9
  • DOI: 10.1002/2015JG002966

A dynamic global vegetation model for studies of the coupled atmosphere-biosphere system: DVGM FOR COUPLED CLIMATE STUDIES
journal, February 2005

  • Krinner, G.; Viovy, Nicolas; de Noblet-Ducoudré, Nathalie
  • Global Biogeochemical Cycles, Vol. 19, Issue 1
  • DOI: 10.1029/2003GB002199

Global response of terrestrial ecosystem structure and function to CO 2 and climate change: results from six dynamic global vegetation models
journal, April 2001


Land-surface parameter optimisation using data assimilation techniques: the adJULES system V1.0
journal, January 2016

  • Raoult, Nina M.; Jupp, Tim E.; Cox, Peter M.
  • Geoscientific Model Development, Vol. 9, Issue 8
  • DOI: 10.5194/gmd-9-2833-2016

Constraining a global ecosystem model with multi-site eddy-covariance data
journal, January 2012


Model–data fusion across ecosystems: from multisite optimizations to global simulations
journal, January 2014

  • Kuppel, S.; Peylin, P.; Maignan, F.
  • Geoscientific Model Development, Vol. 7, Issue 6
  • DOI: 10.5194/gmd-7-2581-2014

Practical Genetic Algorithms
book, May 2003


Estimating parameters of a forest ecosystem C model with measurements of stocks and fluxes as joint constraints
journal, April 2010


Estimating diurnal to annual ecosystem parameters by synthesis of a carbon flux model with eddy covariance net ecosystem exchange observations
journal, February 2005


Optimizing a process-based ecosystem model with eddy-covariance flux measurements: A pine forest in southern France: MODEL OPTIMIZATION USING FLUX DATA
journal, May 2007

  • Santaren, Diego; Peylin, Philippe; Viovy, Nicolas
  • Global Biogeochemical Cycles, Vol. 21, Issue 2
  • DOI: 10.1029/2006GB002834

Assessing parameter variability in a photosynthesis model within and between plant functional types using global Fluxnet eddy covariance data
journal, January 2011


Consistent assimilation of multiple data streams in a carbon cycle data assimilation system
journal, January 2016

  • MacBean, Natasha; Peylin, Philippe; Chevallier, Frédéric
  • Geoscientific Model Development, Vol. 9, Issue 10
  • DOI: 10.5194/gmd-9-3569-2016

A new stepwise carbon cycle data assimilation system using multiple data streams to constrain the simulated land surface carbon cycle
journal, January 2016

  • Peylin, Philippe; Bacour, Cédric; MacBean, Natasha
  • Geoscientific Model Development, Vol. 9, Issue 9
  • DOI: 10.5194/gmd-9-3321-2016

Improving land surface models with FLUXNET data
journal, January 2009


Parameter and prediction uncertainty in an optimized terrestrial carbon cycle model: Effects of constraining variables and data record length
journal, January 2011

  • Ricciuto, Daniel M.; King, Anthony W.; Dragoni, D.
  • Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 116, Issue G1
  • DOI: 10.1029/2010JG001400

Factorial Sampling Plans for Preliminary Computational Experiments
journal, May 1991


Using satellite data to improve the leaf phenology of a global Terrestrial Biosphere Model
journal, January 2015


Practical Genetic Algorithms
journal, September 2005

  • Anderson-Cook, Christine M.
  • Journal of the American Statistical Association, Vol. 100, Issue 471
  • DOI: 10.1198/jasa.2005.s45

Improving land surface models with FLUXNET data
journal, January 2009

  • Williams, M.; Richardson, A. D.; Reichstein, M.
  • Biogeosciences Discussions, Vol. 6, Issue 2
  • DOI: 10.5194/bgd-6-2785-2009

Recent trends and drivers of regional sources and sinks of carbon dioxide
text, January 2015


Climate change projections using the IPSL-CM5 Earth System Model: from CMIP3 to CMIP5
journal, February 2013


The REFLEX project: Comparing different algorithms and implementations for the inversion of a terrestrial ecosystem model against eddy covariance data
journal, October 2009


Inverse modeling of seasonal drought effects on canopy CO 2 /H 2 O exchange in three Mediterranean ecosystems
journal, January 2003


Evaluating the Land and Ocean Components of the Global Carbon Cycle in the CMIP5 Earth System Models
journal, September 2013


Toward more realistic projections of soil carbon dynamics by Earth system models
text, January 2016

  • Luo, Yiqi; Ahlstrom, Anders; Allison, Steven D.
  • AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
  • DOI: 10.35099/aurora-99

Conditions for successful data assimilation
text, January 2013


Recent trends and drivers of regional sources and sinks of carbon dioxide
journal, January 2015


Using satellite data to improve the leaf phenology of a global terrestrial biosphere model
journal, January 2015


Constraining a global ecosystem model with multi-site eddy-covariance data
journal, January 2012


Improving land surface models with FLUXNET data
journal, January 2009

  • Williams, M.; Richardson, A. D.; Reichstein, M.
  • Biogeosciences Discussions, Vol. 6, Issue 2
  • DOI: 10.5194/bgd-6-2785-2009

Filling the gaps in meteorological continuous data measured at FLUXNET sites with ERA-Interim reanalysis
journal, January 2015


Model–data fusion across ecosystems: from multisite optimizations to global simulations
journal, January 2014

  • Kuppel, S.; Peylin, P.; Maignan, F.
  • Geoscientific Model Development, Vol. 7, Issue 6
  • DOI: 10.5194/gmd-7-2581-2014

A new stepwise carbon cycle data assimilation system using multiple data streams to constrain the simulated land surface carbon cycle
journal, January 2016

  • Peylin, Philippe; Bacour, Cédric; MacBean, Natasha
  • Geoscientific Model Development, Vol. 9, Issue 9
  • DOI: 10.5194/gmd-9-3321-2016

Consistent assimilation of multiple data streams in a carbon cycle data assimilation system
journal, January 2016

  • MacBean, Natasha; Peylin, Philippe; Chevallier, Frédéric
  • Geoscientific Model Development, Vol. 9, Issue 10
  • DOI: 10.5194/gmd-9-3569-2016

Works referencing / citing this record:

Developments and applications of terrestrial biosphere model
journal, January 2020

  • Peng, Shu-Shi; Yue, Chao; Chang, Jin-Feng
  • Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, Vol. 44, Issue 4
  • DOI: 10.17521/cjpe.2019.0315