skip to main content

Title: Terrainbento 1.0: a Python package for multi-model analysis in long-term drainage basin evolution

Abstract. Models of landscape evolution provide insight into the geomorphic history of specific field areas, create testable predictions of landform development, demonstrate the consequences of current geomorphic process theory, and spark imagination through hypothetical scenarios. While the last 4 decades have brought the proliferation of many alternative formulations for the redistribution of mass by Earth surface processes, relatively few studies have systematically compared and tested these alternative equations. We present a new Python package, terrainbento 1.0, that enables multi-model comparison, sensitivity analysis, and calibration of Earth surface process models. Terrainbento provides a set of 28 model programs that implement alternative transport laws related to four process elements: hillslope processes, surface-water hydrology, erosion by flowing water, and material properties. The 28 model programs are a systematic subset of the 2048 possible numerical models associated with 11 binary choices. Each binary choice is related to one of these four elements – for example, the use of linear or nonlinear hillslope diffusion. Terrainbento is an extensible framework: base classes that treat the elements common to all numerical models (such as input/output and boundary conditions) make it possible to create a new numerical model without reinventing these common methods. Terrainbento is built on top of more » the Landlab framework such that new Landlab components directly support the creation of new terrainbento model programs. Terrainbento is fully documented, has 100 % unit test coverage including numerical comparison with analytical solutions for process models, and continuous integration testing. We support future users and developers with introductory Jupyter notebooks and a template for creating new terrainbento model programs. In this paper, we describe the package structure, process theory, and software implementation of terrainbento. Finally, we illustrate the utility of terrainbento with a benchmark example highlighting the differences in steady-state topography between five different numerical models.

« less
Authors:
; ; ;
Award ID(s):
1831623 1725774
Publication Date:
NSF-PAR ID:
10107691
Journal Name:
Geoscientific Model Development
Volume:
12
Issue:
4
Page Range or eLocation-ID:
1267 to 1297
ISSN:
1991-9603
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Abstract. Many scientists have begun to refer to the earth surface environment from the upper canopy to the depths of bedrock as the critical zone (CZ). Identification of the CZ as an integral object worthy of study implicitly posits that the study of the whole earth surface will provide benefits that do not arise when studying the individual parts. To study the CZ, however, requires prioritizing among the measurements that can be made – and we do not generally agree on the priorities. Currently, the Susquehanna Shale Hills Critical Zone Observatory (SSHCZO) is expanding from a small original focus area (0.08km2, Shale Hills catchment), to a larger watershed (164km2, Shavers Creek watershed) and is grappling with the prioritization. This effort is an expansion from a monolithologic first-order forested catchment to a watershed that encompasses several lithologies (shale, sandstone, limestone) and land use types (forest, agriculture). The goal of the project remains the same: to understand water, energy, gas, solute, and sediment (WEGSS) fluxes that are occurring today in the context of the record of those fluxes over geologic time as recorded in soil profiles, the sedimentary record, and landscape morphology.

    Given the small size of the Shalemore »Hills catchment, the original design incorporated measurement of as many parameters as possible at high temporal and spatial density. In the larger Shavers Creek watershed, however, we must focus the measurements. We describe a strategy of data collection and modeling based on a geomorphological and land use framework that builds on the hillslope as the basic unit. Interpolation and extrapolation beyond specific sites relies on geophysical surveying, remote sensing, geomorphic analysis, the study of natural integrators such as streams, groundwaters or air, and application of a suite of CZ models. We hypothesize that measurements of a few important variables at strategic locations within a geomorphological framework will allow development of predictive models of CZ behavior. In turn, the measurements and models will reveal how the larger watershed will respond to perturbations both now and into the future.

    « less
  2. Abstract. Numerical simulation of the form and characteristics of Earth's surface provides insight into its evolution. Landlab is an open-source Python package that contains modularized elements of numerical models for Earth's surface, thus reducing time required for researchers to create new or reimplement existing models. Landlab contains a gridding engine which represents the model domain as a dual graph of structured quadrilaterals (e.g., raster) or irregular Voronoi polygon–Delaunay triangle mesh (e.g., regular hexagons, radially symmetric meshes, and fully irregular meshes). Landlab also contains components – modular implementations of single physical processes – and a suite of utilities that support numerical methods, input/output, and visualization. This contribution describes package development since version 1.0 and backward-compatibility-breaking changes that necessitate the new major release, version 2.0. Substantial changes include refactoring the grid, improving the component standard interface, dropping Python 2 support, and creating 31 new components – for a total of 58 components in the Landlab package. We describe reasons why many changes were made in order to provide insight for designers of future packages. We conclude by discussing lessons about the dynamics of scientific software development gained from the experience of using, developing, maintaining, and teaching with Landlab.
  3. Numerical simulation of the form and characteristics of Earth’s surface provides insight into its evolution. Landlab is an Open Source Python package that contains modularized elements of numerical models for Earth’s surface, thus reducing time required for researchers to create new or reimplement existing models. Landlab contains a gridding engine which represents the model domain as a dual graph of structured quadrilaterals (e.g., raster) or irregular Voronoi polygon-Delaunay triangle mesh (e.g., regular hexagons, radially symmetric meshes, fully irregular meshes). Landlab also contains components— modular implementations of single physical processes—and a suite of utilities which support numerical methods, input/output, and visualization. This contribution describes package development since version 1.0 and backward-compatibility breaking changes which necessitates the new major release, version 2.0. Substantial changes include refactoring the grid, improving the component standard interface, dropping Python 2 support, and creating 30 new components—for a total of 57 components in the Landlab package. We describe reasons why many changes were made in order to provide insight to designers of future packages. We conclude by discussing lessons about the dynamics of scientific software development gained from the experience of using, developing, maintaining, and teaching with Landlab.
  4. Cyclical models are often used to describe how students learn and develop. These models usually focus on the cognitive domain and describe how knowledge and skills are learned within a course or classroom. By providing insights into how students learn and thus how an instructor can support learning, these models and the schemas drawn from them also influence beliefs about learning and thus how educational programs are designed and developed. In this paper the authors present an alternative cyclical model of learning that is drawn from a philosophy of enactivism rather than rational dualism. In comparison with the dualism inherent in viewpoints derived from Descartes where learners construct internal mental representation from inputs received from the external world, in enactivism development occurs through continual dynamic interactions between an agent and their environment. Enactivism thus emphasizes the role environments play in learning and development. The model developed in this paper hypothesizes that the environment in which learning typically occurs can be represented by three elements: the learner’s identity and culture which informs personally significant goals and values; the affordances a degree program offers in areas of knowledge, identity, and context which informs the capabilities of the environment; and the implicit andmore »explicit goals of education as they are negotiated and understood by learners and teachers. These three elements are strongly coupled and together define the ever-changing learning environment. The paper explores how changing technologies and cultures affect each of these three elements in regards to students’ ability to become technologically literate. While rational or dualist views of education see such environmental changes as peripheral to developing accurate representations of truth, enactivism posits that environment significantly affects the process of education. Because each student or faculty member is a participant in a learning organization changes within the organization—whether externally or internally driven—change the learning process. If education is deemed successful when students can transfer learning to new contexts, dualist models assume transfer is weakly coupled to educational environments while the enactivist viewpoint posits that environments strongly affect transfer. The enactivist model can inform efforts to encourage technological literacy. Like many areas in STEM, education technological literacy has sought to identify and support learning outcomes that specify effective teaching or content interventions which enable learners to become more technologically literate. From the enactivist perspective, however, technological literacy is achieved by placing individuals into an environment in which they must navigate technology-induced challenges, with success defined as learning processes that allow learners to manage tensions inherent in their environment. Because most students already live in such environments teaching definable or enumerable outcomes makes less sense than helping student to be metacognitive and reflective how they manage and relate with technology.« less
  5. High levels of stress and anxiety are common amongst college students, particularly engineering students. Students report lack of sleep, grades, competition, change in lifestyle, and other significant stressors throughout their undergraduate education (1, 2). Stress and anxiety have been shown to negatively impact student experience (3-6), academic performance (6-8), and retention (9). Previous studies have focused on identifying factors that cause individual students stress while completing undergraduate engineering degree programs (1). However, it not well-understood how a culture of stress is perceived and is propagated in engineering programs or how this culture impacts student levels of identification with engineering. Further, the impact of student stress has not been directly considered in engineering regarding recruitment, retention, and success. Therefore, our guiding research question is: Does the engineering culture create stress for students that hinder their engineering identity development? To answer our research question, we designed a sequential mixed methods study with equal priority of quantitative survey data and qualitative individual interviews. Our study participants are undergraduate engineering students across all levels and majors at a large, public university. Our sample goal is 2000 engineering student respondents. We combined three published surveys to build our quantitative data collection instrument, including the Depressionmore »Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS), Identification with engineering subscale, and Engineering Department Inclusion Level subscale. The objective of the quantitative instrument is to illuminate individual perceptions of the existence of an engineering stress culture (ESC) and create an efficient tool to measure the impact ESC on engineering identity development. Specifically, we seek to understand the relationships among the following constructs; 1) identification with engineering, 2) stress and anxiety, and 3) feelings of inclusion within their department. The focus of this paper presents the results of the pilot of the proposed instrument with 20 participants and a detailed data collection and analysis process. In an effort to validate our instrument, we conducted a pilot study to refine our data collection process and the results will guide the data collection for the larger study. In addition to identifying relationships among construct, the survey data will be further analyzed to specify which demographics are mediating or moderating factors of these relationships. For example, does a student’s 1st generation status influence their perception of stress or engineering identity development? Our analysis may identify discipline-specific stressors and characterize culture components that promote student anxiety and stress. Our objective is to validate our survey instrument and use it to inform the protocol for the follow-up interviews to gain a deeper understanding of the responses to the survey instrument. Understanding what students view as stressful and how students identify stress as an element of program culture will support the development of interventions to mitigate student stress. References 1. Schneider L (2007) Perceived stress among engineering students. A Paper Presented at St. Lawrence Section Conference. Toronto, Canada. Retrieved from: www. asee. morrisville. edu. 2. Ross SE, Niebling BC, & Heckert TM (1999) Sources of stress among college students. Social psychology 61(5):841-846. 3. Goldman CS & Wong EH (1997) Stress and the college student. Education 117(4):604-611. 4. Hudd SS, et al. (2000) Stress at college: Effects on health habits, health status and self-esteem. College Student Journal 34(2):217-228. 5. Macgeorge EL, Samter W, & Gillihan SJ (2005) Academic Stress, Supportive Communication, and Health A version of this paper was presented at the 2005 International Communication Association convention in New York City. Communication Education 54(4):365-372. 6. Burt KB & Paysnick AA (2014) Identity, stress, and behavioral and emotional problems in undergraduates: Evidence for interaction effects. Journal of college student development 55(4):368-384. 7. Felsten G & Wilcox K (1992) Influences of stress and situation-specific mastery beliefs and satisfaction with social support on well-being and academic performance. Psychological Reports 70(1):291-303. 8. Pritchard ME & Wilson GS (2003) Using emotional and social factors to predict student success. Journal of college student development 44(1):18-28. 9. Zhang Z & RiCharde RS (1998) Prediction and Analysis of Freshman Retention. AIR 1998 Annual Forum Paper.« less