scholarly journals A coupled force-restore model of surface temperature and soil moisture using the maximum entropy production model of heat fluxes

2016 ◽  
Vol 121 (13) ◽  
pp. 7528-7547 ◽  
Author(s):  
S.-Y. Huang ◽  
J. Wang
Keyword(s):  
Soil Moisture ◽  
Surface Temperature ◽  
Entropy Production ◽  
Maximum Entropy ◽  
Heat Fluxes ◽  
Production Model ◽  
Maximum Entropy Production

scholarly journals A Maximum Entropy Production Evaporation – Transpiration Product for Australia

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olanrewaju Abiodun ◽  
Okke Batelaan ◽  
Huade Guan ◽  
Jingfeng Wang
Keyword(s):  
Entropy Production ◽  
Maximum Entropy ◽  
Mean Absolute Error ◽  
Absolute Error ◽  
Production Model ◽  
Model Parameters ◽  
Drought Period ◽  
Maximum Entropy Production ◽  
Millennium Drought ◽  
Mean Square Errors

Abstract. The aim of this research is to develop evaporation and transpiration products for Australia based on the maximum entropy production model (MEP). We introduce a method into the MEP algorithm of estimating the required model parameters over the entire Australia through the use of pedotransfer function, soil properties and remotely sensed soil moisture data. Our algorithm calculates the evaporation and transpiration over Australia on daily timescales at the 5 km2 resolution for 2003–2013. The MEP evapotranspiration (ET) estimates are validated using observed ET data from 20 Eddy Covariance (EC) flux towers across 8 land cover types in Australia. We also compare the MEP ET at the EC flux towers with two other ET products over Australia; MOD16 and AWRA-L products. The MEP model outperforms the MOD16 and AWRA-L across the 20 EC flux sites, with average root mean square errors (RMSE), 8.21, 9.87 and 9.22 mm/8 days respectively. The average mean absolute error (MAE) for the MEP, MOD16 and AWRA-L are 6.21, 7.29 and 6.52 mm/8 days, the average correlations are 0.64, 0.57 and 0.61, respectively. The percentage Bias of the MEP ET was within 20 % of the observed ET at 12 of the 20 EC flux sites while the MOD16 and AWRA-L ET were within 20 % of the observed ET at 4 and 10 sites respectively. Our analysis shows that evaporation and transpiration contribute 38 % and 62 %, respectively, to the total ET across the study period which includes a significant part of the “millennium drought” period (2003–2009) in Australia. The data (Abiodun et al., 2019) is available at https://doi.org/10.25901/5ce795d313db8.

scholarly journals Application of the Maximum Entropy Production Model of Evapotranspiration over Partially Vegetated Water-Limited Land Surfaces

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (6) ◽  
pp. 989-1005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Islem Hajji ◽  
Daniel F. Nadeau ◽  
Biljana Music ◽  
François Anctil ◽  
Jingfeng Wang
Keyword(s):  
Water Stress ◽  
Entropy Production ◽  
Maximum Entropy ◽  
Land Surface ◽  
Soil Evaporation ◽  
Stress Conditions ◽  
Production Model ◽  
Weighting Coefficient ◽  
Maximum Entropy Production ◽  
Land Surfaces

Abstract The maximum entropy production (MEP) model based on nonequilibrium thermodynamics and the theory of Bayesian probabilities was recently developed to model land surface fluxes, including soil evaporation and vegetation transpiration. This model requires few input data and ensures the closure of the surface energy balance. This study aims to test the capability of such a model to realistically simulate evapotranspiration (ET) over a wide range of climates and vegetation covers. A weighting coefficient is introduced to calculate total ET from soil evaporation and vegetation transpiration over partially vegetated land surfaces, resulting in the MEP-ET model. Using this coefficient, the model outputs are compared with in situ observations of ET at eight FLUXNET sites across the continental United States. Results confirm the close agreement between the MEP-ET predicted daily ET and the corresponding observations at sites characterized by moderately limited water availability. Poor ET results were obtained under high water stress conditions. A regulation parameter was therefore introduced in the MEP-ET model to properly take into account the effects of soil water stress on stomata, yielding the generalized MEP-ET model. This parameter considerably reduced model biases under water stress conditions for various heterogeneous land surface sites. The generalized MEP-ET model outperforms several popular ET models, including Penman–Monteith (PM), modified Priestley–Taylor–Jet Propulsion Laboratory (PT-JPL), and air-relative-humidity-based two-source model (ARTS) at all test sites.

scholarly journals The Atmospheric Response to Surface Heating under Maximum Entropy Production

2014 ◽  
Vol 71 (6) ◽  
pp. 2204-2220
Author(s):  
A. Gjermundsen ◽  
J. H. LaCasce ◽  
L. S. Graff
Keyword(s):  
Entropy Production ◽  
Maximum Entropy ◽  
Heat Transport ◽  
General Circulation ◽  
Heat Fluxes ◽  
Storm Tracks ◽  
Atmospheric Response ◽  
Maximum Entropy Production ◽  
Surface Temperatures ◽  
Low Latitudes

Abstract In numerous studies, midlatitude storm tracks have been shown to shift poleward under global warming scenarios. Among the possible causes, changes in sea surface temperature (SST) have been shown to affect both the intensity and the position of the tracks. Increased SSTs can increase both the lateral heating occurring in the tropics and the midlatitude temperature gradients, both of which increase tropospheric baroclinicity. To better understand the response to altered SST, a simplified energy balance model (EBM) is used. This employs the principal of maximum entropy production (MEP) to determine the meridional heat fluxes in the atmosphere. The model is similar to one proposed by Paltridge (1975) but represents only the atmospheric response (the surface temperatures are fixed). The model is then compared with a full atmospheric general circulation model [Community Atmosphere Model, version 3 (CAM3)]. In response to perturbed surface temperatures, EBM exhibits similar changes in (vertically integrated) air temperature, convective heat fluxes, and meridional heat transport. However, the changes in CAM3 are often more localized, particularly at low latitudes. This, in turn, results in a shift of the storm tracks in CAM3, which is largely absent in EBM. EBM is more successful, however, at representing the response to changes in high-latitude heating or cooling. Therefore, MEP is evidently a plausible representation for heat transport in the midlatitudes, but not necessarily at low latitudes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document