the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Data-Driven Scaling Methods for Soil Moisture Cosmic Ray Neutron Sensors
Abstract. Cosmic ray neutron probes (CRNS) are increasingly used for soil moisture measurement, yet uncertainties persist due to reliance on traditional analytical scaling methods that may not fully account for site-specific and sensor-specific characteristics. This study introduces a novel, data-driven calibration approach to estimate key scaling parameters (beta, psi, and omega) for CRNS, emphasizing local environmental factors and sensor attributes. The method provides a more flexible, empirical approach to calibration by directly calculating correction parameters from measurement data.
The results demonstrate that the new method is both reliable and robust, showing strong correlations between the estimated parameters and those predicted by analytical methods. However, the study also reveals systematically higher variability in calibration parameters than previously assumed, underscoring the importance of data quality and careful selection of NMDB reference sites. Sensor-specific factors, such as the energy spectrum, along with site-specific factors like elevation and geographic proximity to NMDB sites, significantly influence scaling parameters, highlighting the necessity for site- and sensor-specific calibration to improve soil moisture estimates. Future research should focus on refining these scaling methods and enhancing data quality to further improve CRNS measurement accuracy.
- Preprint
(1622 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 01 Jan 2025)
-
CC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-3108', Todd Caldwell, 29 Nov 2024
reply
The Baatz et al. (2024) paper presents a very clear explanation of all the scaling factors used to correct cosmic ray neutron counts. In particular, sections 2.1.1 to 2.1.3 provide great detail on each. The intro paragraph at line 54 presents each very succinctly. I appreciate their efforts to really illustrate these concepts - and the fact that many of us have inherently considered these essentially fixed parameters.
The authors use inverse modeling to derive model parameters (e.g., beta, omega and psi) and their uncertainty. However, it is a little unclear what the forward model is they are inverting. Equations 1-3 and multiplied to get the total flux correction (Npih, eq. 4) at Line 186. The synthetic experiments are presented well. I am not following inversions of beta, omega and psi at the site level. Could you present the forward model and the error term that is being minimized? Or, if I am off target with the optimization scheme, could you elaborate on the inversion routine a little more?
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3108-CC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on CC1', Roland Baatz, 04 Dec 2024
reply
Thank you for your thoughtful feedback and for highlighting the need to better clarify the inversion process.
Please find our reply attached.
-
AC1: 'Reply on CC1', Roland Baatz, 04 Dec 2024
reply
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-3108', Jingwei Zhou, 17 Dec 2024
reply
This manuscript presents a novel data-driven approach for calibrating scaling parameters used in cosmic-ray neutron sensing (CRNS) for soil moisture measurements. The work makes a meaningful contribution to improving CRNS methodology, though there are some aspects that would benefit from revision. For example, more detailed discussion of the practical implementation of the new approach can be made, what the implications of the new methods for CRNS users can be discussed.
The manuscript is well-structured and generally well-written, though some sections could be more concise and clear. The abstract could better highlight the quantitative improvements achieved over existing methods, the current version of abstract lacks detailed descriptions using some values. In the methods section, I think it would benefit from a general paragraph summarizing what it takes to complete the calibration using the new method, maybe a flowchart can be added.
In all, this paper represents a valuable contribution to the field and is suitable for publication in HESS after moderate revision.
Specific line-by-line comments:
Lines 87-93: The objectives should be stated more explicitly here. Consider put specific research questions and objectives at the beginning.
Lines 315-324: The sensitivity analysis results could be more quantitative when describing impact of parameter variations on soil moisture estimates. Consider refer to specific values (sometimes can be in brackets after your statements) in this section.
Grammar Issues:
Line 74: “effect” to “affect”
Line 142: Missing space after absref
Line 330: “Contour lines show soil moisture differences of 0.00 and 0.02 m³/m³ to reference values.” Consider rephrasing to avoid ambiguity
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3108-RC1 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Roland Baatz, 19 Dec 2024
reply
Thank you for your thoughtful feedback. We appreciate your time and effort in reviewing the manuscript.
Please find our reply attached.
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC1', Roland Baatz, 19 Dec 2024
reply
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-3108', Anonymous Referee #2, 18 Dec 2024
reply
The manuscript presents a novel approach to calibrate CRNS for soil moisture estimation using a data-driven, inverse modeling technique. This method promises to address site-specific and sensor-specific variations that are often overlooked in traditional analytical methods. The idea is innovative and highly relevant to the field. However, there are several areas where the manuscript could be improved:
Comment:
1. The manuscript briefly talked about traditional analytical methods, but including additional details about these in methodology section would enhance its comprehensiveness. A short summary or explanation of how traditional methods are practically implemented, alongside their limitations, could enrich the manuscript significantly. Similarly, further clarification on the forward model used in the inverse method (possibly included in response to the first reviewer's comment) would be beneficial. This inclusion should highlight how analytical method calculate the soil moisture and how the newer approach will calculate. These short or one paragraph would be especially helpful for new readers to better understand the methodology.2.The abstract could be improved by adding the exact results. Specifically mentioning the strong correlations and higher variability.
Overall, the research article is well-written and presents a novel and valuable contribution to CRNS calibration methods.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3108-RC2 -
AC3: 'Reply on RC2', Roland Baatz, 20 Dec 2024
reply
Thank you for your thoughtful feedback. We appreciate your time and effort in reviewing the manuscript.
Please find our reply attached.
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC2', Roland Baatz, 20 Dec 2024
reply
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
206 | 47 | 9 | 262 | 3 | 1 |
- HTML: 206
- PDF: 47
- XML: 9
- Total: 262
- BibTeX: 3
- EndNote: 1
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1