A comparison between two statistical and a physically-based model in snow water equivalent mapping |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Nevada, Reno, Nevada 89557, USA;2. Department of Mathematics, University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming 82071, USA;1. School of Sciences, Zhejiang Agriculture and Forestry University, Lin’an, Zhejiang 311300, PR China;2. Zhejiang Provincial Key Laboratory of Chemical Utilization of Forestry Biomass, Zhejiang A & F University, Lin’an, Zhejiang 311300, PR China;1. Institute for Problems in Mechanics, Russian Academy of Sciences, 101 Vernadsky Avenue, Bldg 1, Moscow 119526, Russia;2. Bauman Moscow State Technical University, 5 Second Baumanskaya Street, Moscow 105005, Russia;3. National Research Nuclear University MEPhI, 31 Kashirskoe Shosse, Moscow 115409, Russia;4. Cardiff University, Heath Park, Cardiff CF14 4XY, UK |
| |
| Abstract: | Snow water equivalent (SWE) estimates at the end of the winter season have been compared for the 2002–2006 period in a 200 km2 mountainous area in Switzerland, using three different models. The first model, ALPINE3D, is a physically based process-oriented model, which solves the snowpack energy and mass balance equations. The other two models, SWE-SEM and HS-SWE, are statistical algorithms interpolating snow data on a grid. While SWE-SEM interpolates local estimates of SWE, HS-SWE converts interpolated snow depth maps into maps of SWE using a regionally-calibrated conversion model. We discuss similarities and differences among the models’ results, both in terms of total volume, and spatial distribution of SWE. The comparison shows a general good agreement of the results of the three models, with a mean difference in the total volumes between the two statistical models of ～8%, and between the physical model and the statistical ones of ～?3% to ?10%. |
| |
| Keywords: | Snow water equivalent Physical model Statistical model Comparison |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
