the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
River cross-section estimation from lidar altimetry products with lidarcross v1
Abstract. River cross-sections, i.e. riverbed elevation profiles across the river, are required for hydrodynamic modeling in flood risk assessment and flood forecasting but are expensive and time-consuming to survey in the field. Remotely sensed cross-sections can fill the gap in data-scarce areas, with novel satellite missions enabling increased accuracy compared to previous methods. We present a method for estimating river cross-sections from lidar altimetry products and a discharge time series. The exposed cross-section is delineated using high spatial resolution ICESat-2 or airborne lidar point clouds. The submerged section is then inferred using water surface slope from the lidar products together with a discharge input. Assuming the diffusive wave approximation, the energy slope is taken to be equal to the estimated water surface slope. Manning’s equation is subsequently applied to estimate the conveyance at the time of observation. Finally, the full section is defined assuming a roughness parameter and a conceptual submerged shape. The method is implemented in an open-source python package called lidarcross, enabling users to define cross-sections for hydrodynamic models in data-scarce areas. Validation is performed using examples from four surveyed rivers spanning a range of spatial scales. Area and conveyance curves derived from surveyed and lidar-based cross-sections are compared, yielding median WSE differences of approx. 0.5 m. The results demonstrate that the method successfully captures the hydraulic behavior of the channel. Residual errors are primarily attributed to uncertainties in discharge and water surface slope estimates.
- Preprint
(36662 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(83 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 27 Oct 2026)
-
CEC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-4865 - No compliance with the policy of the journal', Juan Antonio Añel, 22 Sep 2026
reply
-
AC1: 'Reply on CEC1', Aske Folkmann Musaeus, 23 Sep 2026
reply
Dear Juan A. Añel
Thank you for your comment on our submission.
We apologize for not sufficiently meeting the requirements of the 'Code and Data' Policy.
We understood the initially referenced repositories to be satisfactory, but we will instead publish the ICESat-2 and topographic datasets as well as the tile matching in an updated version of the Zenodo archive. We will provide a link and DOI to the updated version as soon as it has been published.
Any future versions of the manuscript will contain an updated 'Code and Data Availability' section describing the contents of the updated Zenodo archive.
Thank you again for your contribution.
Best regards,
The authors
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-4865-AC1 -
CEC2: 'Reply on AC1', Juan Antonio Añel, 23 Sep 2026
reply
Dear authors,
Thanks for your reply. Please, publish here in Discussion the link to the mentioned repository as soon as you have it, as it must be available for public review and Discussion. I would like to note that you must publish it with time enough before the finishing of the Discussions stage, and not only after it is closed as a reply to the Editors.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-4865-CEC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on CEC2', Aske Folkmann Musaeus, 02 Oct 2026
reply
Dear Juan A. Añel,
Thank you for your insights and suggestions.
An updated version of the archive is now published at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23100283
As the archive is published as an updated version of the original, readers who use the link in the manuscript will be notified that a newer version exists.
This version contains notebooks and all necessary inputs, including lidar products, to generate and evaluate cross-sections in the four case study locations. It also contains the script to match lidar tiles to cross-section locations. The archive contains intermediate products in all steps, as well as copies of the exact cross-sections sets used for performance statistics in the manuscript. In situ comparison cross-sections are provided for two of the study sites. The other two are referenced in both the archive and the manuscript in FAIR-principled repositories with DOIs.
Additionally, the archive contains .yml files to create a python 3.11 environment with the necessary modules to run all scripts in the archive.
We hope that this update will improve replicability of the study
Best regards,
The authors
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-4865-AC2 -
CEC3: 'Reply on AC2', Juan Antonio Añel, 02 Oct 2026
reply
Dear authors,
Thanks for addressing this issue. I have checked the repositories and we can consider now the current version of your manuscript in compliance with the code policy of the journal.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-4865-CEC3
-
CEC3: 'Reply on AC2', Juan Antonio Añel, 02 Oct 2026
reply
-
AC2: 'Reply on CEC2', Aske Folkmann Musaeus, 02 Oct 2026
reply
-
CEC2: 'Reply on AC1', Juan Antonio Añel, 23 Sep 2026
reply
-
AC1: 'Reply on CEC1', Aske Folkmann Musaeus, 23 Sep 2026
reply
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 321 | 147 | 61 | 529 | 57 | 53 | 50 |
- HTML: 321
- PDF: 147
- XML: 61
- Total: 529
- Supplement: 57
- BibTeX: 53
- EndNote: 50
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
Dear authors,
Unfortunately, after checking your manuscript, it has come to our attention that it does not comply with our "Code and Data Policy".
https://www.geoscientific-model-development.net/policies/code_and_data_policy.html
To access part of the data used in your work, namely ICESat-2 datasets, topographic lidar datasets, you cite two documents and a site that we can not accept as repositories, as they do not contain the data published openly, with a permanend handler (e.g. DOI) and do not provide a policy for long-term deposit. Additionally, you do not provide a matching of lidar tile to cross-section, something that is not acceptable according to the policy of the journal.
This is something that we can not accept. Our policy is clear regarding the fact that all the code and data necessary to replicate a manuscript must be published in acceptable repositories without limitation at the time of submitting the manuscript to the journal. Due to this, your manuscript should have not been accepted for Discussions or peer review in the journal, and therefore the current situation is irregular.
The GMD review and publication process depends on reviewers and community commentators being able to access, during the discussion phase, the code and data on which a manuscript depends, and on ensuring the provenance of replicability of the published papers for years after their publication. Please, therefore, publish your code and data in one of the appropriate repositories and reply to this comment with the relevant information (link and a permanent identifier for it (e.g. DOI)) as soon as possible. We cannot have manuscripts under discussion that do not comply with our policy.
Later, if the Topical Editor decides to continue with the review or publication process of your manuscript and you are requested to upload a new version of it, then The 'Code and Data Availability’ section of your manuscript must also be modified to cite the new repository locations, and corresponding references added to the bibliography.
I must note that if you do not fix this problem, we cannot continue with the peer-review process or accept your manuscript for publication in GMD.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor