the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
A physics-informed machine learning (PIML) framework for projecting 21st-century permafrost extent in Northeast China
Abstract. The degradation of marginal permafrost is a sensitive indicator of climate change, with far-reaching implications on regional ecosystems, hydrology, and infrastructure. Located near the southern limit of latitudinal permafrost (SLLP) in Eastern Asia, Northeast China has experienced pronounced permafrost retreat and persistent ground warming in recent decades. This study develops a physics-informed machine learning (PIML) framework that integrates the Temperature at the Top of Permafrost (TTOP) model, observed changes in land use and land cover (LULC), and climate projections from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project 6 (CMIP6) to improve the understanding and prediction of permafrost dynamics in the region. Results indicate that, under the SSP5-8.5 scenario, permafrost extent may decline by more than 90 % by the end of the 21st century, primarily driven by a sharp reduction in the air freezing index (AFI), especially in high-latitude and high-elevation zones. Land use and cover changes (LUCC), particularly urban expansion and deforestation, further exacerbate ground thermal disturbances. Spatially, mountainous forested areas, such as the Da Xing’anling Mountains, exhibit relatively greater resilience to warming due to dense vegetation and complex topography that help buffer surface energy fluxes. Feature attribution analysis identifies surface temperature, snow cover duration, and vegetation as dominant drivers of permafrost stability, while Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection (UMAP) clustering reveals distinct degradation trajectories across different land cover types. This study highlights the complex interplay of climatic and anthropogenic factors in permafrost evolution and demonstrates the utility of integrating physical modelling with machine learning to support ecological conservation and infrastructure risk management in cold regions environment.
- Preprint
(6275 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(2140 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 31 Dec 2025)
-
CC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-4544', Xianglong Li, 20 Nov 2025
reply
-
AC1: 'Reply on CC1', Shuai Huang, 03 Dec 2025
reply
Comment:
I believe the author has done an excellent job, but I think it would be preferable to compare such predictions with permafrost mapping or field survey results from the observed time period.
Response:
Dear Dr. Li:
Thank you very much for your constructive suggestion. We fully agree that comparing our simulation results with existing permafrost maps and field-based evidence is essential for strengthening the reliability of model outputs. In response to your comment, we have added a comprehensive comparison between our simulated permafrost distribution during 2001–2020 and two recently published Northern Hemisphere permafrost maps (Ran et al., 2022; Obu et al., 2019). The newly added content is presented in the revised manuscript (Lines 343–364) and the comparison is illustrated in the newly added Figure 5. Revision as below:
L343-364:
In addition, we compared the permafrost distribution simulated by the MLP model in this study during 2001–2020 with the recently published Northern Hemisphere permafrost maps (as shown in Fig. 5). Across the three permafrost maps, we observed a consistent representation of the widespread permafrost distribution in the Da Xing’anling Mountains, with the SLLP located approximately in the Arxan mountains. However, notable discrepancies occur among studies for the permafrost distribution in the Xiao Xing’anling Mountains, the Hulunbuir Plateau, and the southern mountainous regions (Huanggangliang Mountains and Changbai Mountains). For the Xiao Xing’anling region, our results are more consistent with those of Ran et al. (2022), but differ significantly from Obu et al. (2019). According to Huang et al. (2025), the SLLP in the Xiao Xing’anling mountains is located approximately between Heihe and Bei’an, which agrees well with our simulation. For the Hulunbuir Plateau, our estimation lies between the results of Ran et al. (2022) and Obu et al. (2019). However, due to the limited availability of field observations in this area, further verification is required. Regarding SLLP characteristics, the simulated permafrost distribution near the southern boundary in this study appears more scattered, reflecting the presence of isolated permafrost patches near the SLLP. This pattern is consistent with the actual conditions. With respect to the permafrost in the southern mountainous regions of Northeast China, our results and those of Ran et al. (2022) and Obu et al. (2019) all indicate the presence of permafrost. However, Obu et al. suggest a more extensive permafrost area in the Huanggangliang mountains, whereas both our study and Ran et al. (2022) show a more sporadic distribution. Based on the synthesis by Jin et al. (2025) and field surveys, permafrost in the southern mountainous regions of Northeast China may indeed exist but is difficult to detect; its occurrence is likely controlled by local factors. These findings further support the results of this study.
-
CC3: 'Reply on AC1', Xianglong Li, 03 Dec 2025
reply
I’m very interested in this article, and these additional analyses will greatly enhance the reliability of the predictions. This work is truly meaningful.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-4544-CC3
-
CC3: 'Reply on AC1', Xianglong Li, 03 Dec 2025
reply
-
AC1: 'Reply on CC1', Shuai Huang, 03 Dec 2025
reply
-
CC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-4544', Guojie Hu, 01 Dec 2025
reply
This study develops a PIML framework that integrates physically based modeling with machine learning and incorporates dynamic land-use/land-cover changes to simulate and project permafrost evolution in Northeast China. The methodology demonstrates a certain degree of innovation. Since the study area is located near the SLLP in East Asia, its permafrost characteristics are regionally representative, and the findings provide valuable regional applicability and scientific insight. The manuscript is overall well written, but minor improvements can be made regarding clarity of expression as well as figure and text descriptions. The specific comments are as follows:
- The abstract predominantly provides qualitative descriptions. It is recommended to include more quantitative results to enhance informativeness.
- In Section 3.2, it is suggested to add comparisons with existing permafrost maps developed for the same region.
- In Figure 7, please indicate the spatial extents corresponding to the Da Xing’anling Mountains, Xiao Xing’anling Mountains, the northern Song-Nen rivers Plain, and the Hulun Buir Plateau.
- Lines 327–328 and 564–565 contain inaccurate wording, as the predictive accuracies of MLP and CatBoost differ depending on the metric used; thus, it is inappropriate to state that both models simultaneously exhibit the best performance.
- In Lines 564–565, MAE is mentioned without prior reference, which seems to be a typographical error where MSE was mistakenly written as MAE.
- The unit of MSE in the manuscript should be °C2 instead of °C.
-
AC2: 'Reply on CC2', Shuai Huang, 05 Dec 2025
reply
We sincerely thank Dr. Hu for the careful review and support of our manuscript. Our response letter is provided in the attachment; please kindly check it.
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 227 | 48 | 25 | 300 | 28 | 11 | 12 |
- HTML: 227
- PDF: 48
- XML: 25
- Total: 300
- Supplement: 28
- BibTeX: 11
- EndNote: 12
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
I believe the author has done an excellent job, but I think it would be preferable to compare such predictions with permafrost mapping or field survey results from the observed time period.