2017
DOI: 10.17485/ijst/2017/v10i18/103522
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluating Land Surface Models in WRF Simulations over DMIC Region

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
5
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
1
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In all the WRF experiments, the wet season RMSE values were considerably larger than the respective dry season values, which caused by the higher rainfall magnitude in the wet season. This result agreed with Jain et al. (2017) study in the Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 92%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…In all the WRF experiments, the wet season RMSE values were considerably larger than the respective dry season values, which caused by the higher rainfall magnitude in the wet season. This result agreed with Jain et al. (2017) study in the Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 92%
“…Although WRF is a widely used RCM, the choice of parameterization schemes is site-specific (Mooney et al., 2016; Jain et al., 2017; Mugume et al., 2017). The LSMs and land use data have been a substantial influence on local climate simulations, especially in areas where land surface characteristics dynamically changed (Deng et al., 2013).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Multiple important processes of the earth's surface are addressed by this parameterization, such as evapotranspiration from canopy water, evapotranspiration from snow, runoffs and melting of snow, depending on the complexity of the scheme used. Several comparative studies have demonstrated that meteorological models are sensitive to the choice of LSM (Pei et al, 2014;Wharton et al, 2015;Lee et al, 2016;Jain et al, 2017;Salamanca et al, 2018;Liu et al, 2019).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%