Benchmarking and evaluating the NASA Land Information System (version 7.5.2) coupled with the refactored Noah-MP land surface model (version 5.0)

Abstract. We integrate the refactored community Noah-MP version 5.0 model with the NASA Land Information System (LIS) version 7.5.2 to streamline the synchronization, development, and maintenance of Noah-MP within LIS and to enhance their interoperability and applicability. We evaluate and compare 5-year (2018–2022) global and regional benchmark simulations of LIS/Noah-MPv5.0 and LIS/Noah-MPv4.0.1 for a set of key land surface variables. Both models capture the spatial and seasonal distributions of observed soil moisture, latent heat (LH), snow water equivalent (SWE), snow depth, snow cover, and surface albedo, with similar bias patterns. Both models tend to underestimate soil moisture over wet soil regimes and overestimate over dry soil regimes, with slightly higher (≤ ∼ 0.01 m3 m−3 for global mean) soil moisture in LIS/Noah-MPv5.0 than LIS/Noah-MPv4.0.1 across most regions. The model bias patterns of LH overall follow those of soil moisture, while LIS/Noah-MPv5.0 has a lower LH across many non-polar regions than LIS/Noah-MPv4.0.1, which reduces the global mean LH bias from 0.99 to −0.39 W m−2. The model SWE bias patterns are dominated by the precipitation and temperature forcing uncertainties, with slightly lower SWE values in LIS/Noah-MPv5.0 (global mean bias of −13.2 mm) than LIS/Noah-MPv4.0.1 (global mean bias of −10.1 mm). The model bias patterns of snow depth generally follow those of SWE. LIS/Noah-MPv4.0.1 consistently overestimates snow cover globally with a mean bias of 0.11, while LIS/Noah-MPv5.0 effectively reduces the overestimates across the global snowpacks with a mean bias of 0.07 because of updated snow cover parameters. Both models show widespread overestimates of surface albedo over mid-latitude and high-latitude regions but significant underestimates in the Sahara Desert and Antarctica. Overall, LIS/Noah-MPv5.0 outperforms or is similar to LIS/Noah-MPv4.0.1 in the evaluated land surface variables, except for slight degradation in simulated surface soil moisture and SWE. This study reveals possible model deficiencies, motivates future improvements in coupled canopy-snowpack-soil processes and input soil data, and points to the importance of considering observational and forcing data uncertainties in model evaluation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Geoscientific model development
Published
2025-11-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-8439-2025
Primary Topic
Soil Moisture and Remote Sensing
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Benchmarking and evaluating the NASA Land Information System (version 7.5.2) coupled with the refactored Noah-MP land surface model (version 5.0)

David M. Mocko, Jerry Wegiel, Ronnie Abolafia‐Rosenzweig, Sujay V. Kumar et al.
Geoscientific model development
Soil Moisture and Remote Sensing
article

Benchmarking and evaluating the NASA Land Information System (version 7.5.2) coupled with the refactored Noah-MP land surface model (version 5.0)

David M. Mocko, Jerry Wegiel, Ronnie Abolafia‐Rosenzweig, Sujay V. Kumar, Tzu‐Shun Lin
article en

Abstract

Abstract. We integrate the refactored community Noah-MP version 5.0 model with the NASA Land Information System (LIS) version 7.5.2 to streamline the synchronization, development, and maintenance of Noah-MP within LIS and to enhance their interoperability and applicability. We evaluate and compare 5-year (2018–2022) global and regional benchmark simulations of LIS/Noah-MPv5.0 and LIS/Noah-MPv4.0.1 for a set of key land surface variables. Both models capture the spatial and seasonal distributions of observed soil moisture, latent heat (LH), snow water equivalent (SWE), snow depth, snow cover, and surface albedo, with similar bias patterns. Both models tend to underestimate soil moisture over wet soil regimes and overestimate over dry soil regimes, with slightly higher (≤ ∼ 0.01 m3 m−3 for global mean) soil moisture in LIS/Noah-MPv5.0 than LIS/Noah-MPv4.0.1 across most regions. The model bias patterns of LH overall follow those of soil moisture, while LIS/Noah-MPv5.0 has a lower LH across many non-polar regions than LIS/Noah-MPv4.0.1, which reduces the global mean LH bias from 0.99 to −0.39 W m−2. The model SWE bias patterns are dominated by the precipitation and temperature forcing uncertainties, with slightly lower SWE values in LIS/Noah-MPv5.0 (global mean bias of −13.2 mm) than LIS/Noah-MPv4.0.1 (global mean bias of −10.1 mm). The model bias patterns of snow depth generally follow those of SWE. LIS/Noah-MPv4.0.1 consistently overestimates snow cover globally with a mean bias of 0.11, while LIS/Noah-MPv5.0 effectively reduces the overestimates across the global snowpacks with a mean bias of 0.07 because of updated snow cover parameters. Both models show widespread overestimates of surface albedo over mid-latitude and high-latitude regions but significant underestimates in the Sahara Desert and Antarctica. Overall, LIS/Noah-MPv5.0 outperforms or is similar to LIS/Noah-MPv4.0.1 in the evaluated land surface variables, except for slight degradation in simulated surface soil moisture and SWE. This study reveals possible model deficiencies, motivates future improvements in coupled canopy-snowpack-soil processes and input soil data, and points to the importance of considering observational and forcing data uncertainties in model evaluation.

Geoscientific model developmentVol. 18(21)
NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research (US), Goddard Space Flight Center (US), Science Applications International Corporation (United States) (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 68%
Soil Moisture and Remote Sensing
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.