Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-3913
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-3913
28 Jul 2026
 | 28 Jul 2026
Status: this preprint is open for discussion and under review for Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences (NHESS).

Comparing and validating modelled snow stability metrics

Jürg Schweizer, Benjamin Reuter, Christoph Mitterer, Fabiano Monti, and Stephanie Mayer

Abstract. Recent developments in snow stability modelling demonstrated the great potential of numerical snow cover modelling for avalanche forecasting. These recently developed metrics provided promising results, possibly even superseding traditional stability indices. To further validate these results, we compared the temporal evolution of various stability metrics to a unique dataset of measurements, including snow stratigraphy, snow microstructure, and stability obtained at the high Alpine study site Steintälli above Davos (Eastern Swiss Alps) during the winter 2015/16. There, we measured the shear strength of a prominent weak layer of depth hoar crystals using the shear frame and assessed the propagation propensity of this weak layer with propagation saw tests. Concurrently, we characterized snow microstructure with the snow micro-penetrometer (SMP). At the study site, an automated weather station is located, providing the data to run the numerical snow cover model SNOWPACK so that modelled stability metrics can be derived. Field measurements showed that weak layer strength and toughness were initially low but increased over time, in parallel with the increasing slab load; all three parameters were correlated. While field observations focused on the most prominent weak layer, modelled stability metrics were evaluated for the persistent weak layers identified by the respective modelling approaches. These generally corresponded well to the layers visually identified in simulated snow stratigraphy. Data-driven and process-based stability metrics exhibited similar temporal evolution and comparable skill in relation to local avalanche activity, achieving overall accuracies of 60–70 %. This site-specific validation demonstrates that both types of numerical stability metrics provide valuable support for avalanche forecasting, although differences in their behaviour highlight the need for metric-specific interpretation. Hence, a multi-model approach may be advantageous for operational forecasting.

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this paper. While Copernicus Publications makes every effort to include appropriate place names, the final responsibility lies with the authors. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.
Share
Jürg Schweizer, Benjamin Reuter, Christoph Mitterer, Fabiano Monti, and Stephanie Mayer

Status: open (until 08 Sep 2026)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
Jürg Schweizer, Benjamin Reuter, Christoph Mitterer, Fabiano Monti, and Stephanie Mayer
Jürg Schweizer, Benjamin Reuter, Christoph Mitterer, Fabiano Monti, and Stephanie Mayer
Metrics will be available soon.
Latest update: 28 Jul 2026
Download
Short summary
Avalanche forecasting increasingly relies on numerical predictions of snow stability. We present the first comparison of traditional as well as AI-based stability metrics and validate them against avalanche observations. The metrics show a similar level of performance. Combining both process-based and data-driven metrics provides the most reliable forecasts.
Share