Estimating Regional Snow Water Equivalent Using a Physics‐Informed Graph Convolution Network Model

Abstract Snow water equivalent (SWE), which quantifies the amount of water in a snowpack, is critical for water supply forecasting. This study explores machine learning (ML) models' capability of representing the spatial distribution of SWE across the western United States. Nine graph convolution network (GCN) models using different loss functions, including a series of physics‐informed loss functions, are developed and compared to a baseline extra tree (ET) model. Different approaches for physics‐informed loss function are examined according to the correlation among geographic and meteorological conditions and are expected to help ML models better capture SWE variability. Terrain characteristics, meteorological variables, and snow cover products are used as input features for regional SWE estimation. All ML models are trained on data sets at selected in situ sites during 2018–2021 and evaluated with 9 days in January–March 2025. Results show that GCN models generally outperform the ET model, capturing SWE spatial variability more effectively and achieving higher statistical metrics. The use of the SWE‐elevation‐precipitation‐based physics‐informed loss function provides the best results among all models with an improved coefficient of determination ( R 2 ) of 0.28 and the lowest root mean square error (RMSE) of 0.22 m, while underestimation is observed for high SWE. A site‐by‐site comparison reveals that model estimates from the GCN models generally agree with observations with R 2 of 0.5–0.9, showing a reliable capability of estimating SWE at a single given site. However, the GCN models still have limited spatiotemporal generalization affected by the restricted representation of site measurements.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Earth and Space Science
Published
2026-11-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1029/2025ea004970
Primary Topic
Cryospheric studies and observations
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Estimating Regional Snow Water Equivalent Using a Physics‐Informed Graph Convolution Network Model

Annie Burgess, Justin Matthew Pflug, Daniel Tong, Nicoleta C. Cristea et al.
Earth and Space Science
Cryospheric studies and observations
article

Estimating Regional Snow Water Equivalent Using a Physics‐Informed Graph Convolution Network Model

Annie Burgess, Justin Matthew Pflug, Daniel Tong, Nicoleta C. Cristea, Ziheng Sun, Wei‐Ting Hung, Bowen Cui, Keren Zhou
article en

Abstract

Abstract Snow water equivalent (SWE), which quantifies the amount of water in a snowpack, is critical for water supply forecasting. This study explores machine learning (ML) models' capability of representing the spatial distribution of SWE across the western United States. Nine graph convolution network (GCN) models using different loss functions, including a series of physics‐informed loss functions, are developed and compared to a baseline extra tree (ET) model. Different approaches for physics‐informed loss function are examined according to the correlation among geographic and meteorological conditions and are expected to help ML models better capture SWE variability. Terrain characteristics, meteorological variables, and snow cover products are used as input features for regional SWE estimation. All ML models are trained on data sets at selected in situ sites during 2018–2021 and evaluated with 9 days in January–March 2025. Results show that GCN models generally outperform the ET model, capturing SWE spatial variability more effectively and achieving higher statistical metrics. The use of the SWE‐elevation‐precipitation‐based physics‐informed loss function provides the best results among all models with an improved coefficient of determination ( R 2 ) of 0.28 and the lowest root mean square error (RMSE) of 0.22 m, while underestimation is observed for high SWE. A site‐by‐site comparison reveals that model estimates from the GCN models generally agree with observations with R 2 of 0.5–0.9, showing a reliable capability of estimating SWE at a single given site. However, the GCN models still have limited spatiotemporal generalization affected by the restricted representation of site measurements.

Earth and Space ScienceVol. 13(11)
Goddard Space Flight Center (US), George Mason University (US), University of Washington (US), Montana State University (US), Earth System Science Interdisciplinary Center (US), University of Maryland, College Park (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 20%
Cryospheric studies and observations
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.

Laika access coming soon