the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
| 22 Sep 2026
ERF-LSFIRE v1.0: Coupling a Level-Set Fire Model with the Energy Research and Forecasting Model for Fire-Atmosphere Simulations
Abstract. Wildland fire behavior is shaped by interactions among fuels, terrain, weather, and the lower atmosphere. Winds and fuel conditions control fire spread, while heat and moisture released by the fire can modify atmospheric stability and local winds, feeding back onto subsequent fire behavior. Here we present ERF-LSFIRE v1.0, a coupled fire–atmosphere modeling framework that integrates a C++/AMReX level-set surface-fire spread model based on the Rothermel formulation with the Energy Research and Forecasting model (ERF), providing a modular and scalable computational foundation for high-resolution coupled fire–atmosphere simulations. LSFIRE can be run standalone with prescribed winds or coupled to ERF in one-way and two-way configurations, with fire-generated sensible heat and moisture returned to the atmosphere in the two-way configuration. We verify the level-set implementation using analytical spread tests over flat and uniformly sloping terrain and demonstrate the coupled framework using simulations of the 2025 Palisades Fire in California and 2025 Cram Fire in Oregon. Standalone LSFIRE closely reproduces the analytical elliptical spread solutions. In the strongly wind-driven Palisades case, two-way coupling with ERF produces localized atmospheric perturbations but only modest changes in perimeter-scale spread. In the Cram case, where background winds are weaker and more variable, fire feedback produces larger near-fire perturbations and substantially alters fire progression relative to the one-way coupled simulation. These results demonstrate that ERF-LSFIRE provides a flexible framework for examining fire–atmosphere feedbacks and suggest that the influence of two-way coupling depends on the strength of fire-induced perturbations relative to the ambient flow. The framework also provides a basis for future applications involving wildfire impacts on energy-system operations and resilience.
- Preprint
(3910 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 18 Nov 2026)
-
CEC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-5430 - Non compliance with the policy of the journal', Juan Antonio Añel, 23 Sep 2026
reply
-
AC1: 'Reply on CEC1', Ye Liu, 23 Sep 2026
reply
Dear Dr. Añel,
Thank you for pointing out the code and data archival requirements. We have now archived the exact source code and the model input/reproduction data used in the manuscript in Zenodo, with permanent DOIs:
ERF-LSFIRE v1.0 and LSFIRE v1.0 source code:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22924587ERF-LSFIRE v1.0 model inputs and reproduction data:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22925403The data archive contains the atmospheric forcing and boundary-condition files from HRRR, LANDFIRE fuel fields, fire initialization data, model configuration files, and idealized verification data used for the simulations reported in the manuscript. The FEDS observational dataset was already cited through its existing Zenodo archive.
Both Zenodo records have also been linked to the manuscript DOI.
We will update the Code and Data Availability section and the corresponding references in the manuscript accordingly when requested to upload a new manuscript version.
Thank you for bringing this issue to our attention.
Best regards,
Ye Liu
on behalf of the authorsCitation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-5430-AC1 -
CEC2: 'Reply on AC1', Juan Antonio Añel, 24 Sep 2026
reply
Dear authors,
Many thanks for your quick reply. Unfortunately, it does not satisfy the requirements exposed in my previous comment. You must share in acceptable repositories all the code and data used to produce your manuscript. In your reply it is missing a repository for the ERF model and, if my assessment is correct, you only share processed data, not the original data that you have used for your study.
Therefore, we can not consider the current version of your manuscript in compliance with the code and data policy of the journal. Please, reply to this comment with the requested repositories for the missing code and data.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-5430-CEC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on CEC2', Ye Liu, 28 Sep 2026
reply
Dear Dr. Añel,
Thank you for the clarification. We have now revised the archives to address the missing code and original input data noted in your previous comment.
The materials used in the manuscript are now archived in the following Zenodo records:
Source code and idealized verification data
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22924587
This archive includes the exact versions of ERF-LSFIRE, standalone LSFIRE, and ERF used for the simulations, together with the idealized verification data.Cram Fire simulation data
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22925403
This archive includes the original HRRR GRIB2 data used as input to WPS, the original LANDFIRE FBFM40 data, processed model inputs, configuration files, model outputs, and analysis materials used for the Cram Fire simulations.Palisades Fire simulation data
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23001391
This archive includes the original HRRR GRIB2 data used as input to WPS, the original LANDFIRE FBFM40 data, processed model inputs, configuration files, model outputs, and analysis materials used for the Palisades Fire simulations.We will update the Code and Data Availability section and the corresponding references in the manuscript accordingly when requested to upload a revised version.
Thank you again for your guidance.
Best regards,
Ye Liu
on behalf of the authorsCitation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-5430-AC2 -
CEC3: 'Reply on AC2', Juan Antonio Añel, 28 Sep 2026
reply
Dear authors,
Thanks for addressing this issue so quickly. 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-2026-5430-CEC3
-
CEC3: 'Reply on AC2', Juan Antonio Añel, 28 Sep 2026
reply
-
AC2: 'Reply on CEC2', Ye Liu, 28 Sep 2026
reply
-
CEC2: 'Reply on AC1', Juan Antonio Añel, 24 Sep 2026
reply
-
AC1: 'Reply on CEC1', Ye Liu, 23 Sep 2026
reply
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 407 | 128 | 47 | 582 | 41 | 35 |
- HTML: 407
- PDF: 128
- XML: 47
- Total: 582
- BibTeX: 41
- EndNote: 35
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
You have archived your code on GitHub. However, GitHub is not a suitable repository for scientific publication. GitHub itself instructs authors to use other long-term archival and publishing alternatives, such as Zenodo, and the policy of the journal clearly states that they can not be accepted for publication.
In addition, to get access to part of the data used in your work you cite several sites (e.g. AWS and Landfire.gov) that do not fulfil GMD’s requirements for a persistent data archive because:
- They do not appear to have a published policy for data preservation over many years or decades (some flexibility exists over the precise length of preservation, but the policy must exist).
- They do not appear to have a published mechanism for preventing authors from unilaterally removing material. Archives must have a policy which makes removal of materials only possible in exceptional circumstances and subject to an independent curatorial decision,
- They do not appear to issue a persistent identifier such as a DOI or Handle for each precise dataset.
If we have missed a published policy which does in fact address this matter satisfactorily, please post a response linking to it. If you have any questions about this issue, please post them in a reply.
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. Due to the lack of compliance above mentioned, you manuscript should not be accepted for Discussions and peer review in the journal. 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