The Cryosphere (Apr 2017)
How accurate are estimates of glacier ice thickness? Results from ITMIX, the Ice Thickness Models Intercomparison eXperiment
- D. Farinotti,
- D. J. Brinkerhoff,
- G. K. C. Clarke,
- J. J. Fürst,
- H. Frey,
- P. Gantayat,
- F. Gillet-Chaulet,
- C. Girard,
- M. Huss,
- P. W. Leclercq,
- A. Linsbauer,
- H. Machguth,
- C. Martin,
- F. Maussion,
- M. Morlighem,
- C. Mosbeux,
- A. Pandit,
- A. Portmann,
- A. Rabatel,
- R. Ramsankaran,
- T. J. Reerink,
- O. Sanchez,
- P. A. Stentoft,
- S. Singh Kumari,
- W. J. J. van Pelt,
- B. Anderson,
- T. Benham,
- D. Binder,
- J. A. Dowdeswell,
- A. Fischer,
- K. Helfricht,
- S. Kutuzov,
- I. Lavrentiev,
- R. McNabb,
- G. H. Gudmundsson,
- H. Li,
- L. M. Andreassen
Affiliations
- D. Farinotti
- Laboratory of Hydraulics, Hydrology and Glaciology (VAW), ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- D. J. Brinkerhoff
- Geophysical Institute, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, AK, USA
- G. K. C. Clarke
- Department of Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- J. J. Fürst
- Institute of Geography, Friedrich Alexander University of Erlangen-Nuremberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany
- H. Frey
- Department of Geography, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- P. Gantayat
- Divecha Centre for Climate Change, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India
- F. Gillet-Chaulet
- Institut des Géosciences de l'Environnement (IGE), Université Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, IRD, Grenoble, France
- C. Girard
- Department of Earth System Science, University of California Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA
- M. Huss
- Laboratory of Hydraulics, Hydrology and Glaciology (VAW), ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- P. W. Leclercq
- Department of Geosciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
- A. Linsbauer
- Department of Geography, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- H. Machguth
- Department of Geography, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- C. Martin
- British Antarctic Survey, Natural Environment Research Council, Cambridge, UK
- F. Maussion
- Institute of Atmospheric and Cryospheric Sciences, University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
- M. Morlighem
- Department of Earth System Science, University of California Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA
- C. Mosbeux
- Institut des Géosciences de l'Environnement (IGE), Université Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, IRD, Grenoble, France
- A. Pandit
- Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay, India
- A. Portmann
- Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research (WSL), Birmensdorf, Switzerland
- A. Rabatel
- Institut des Géosciences de l'Environnement (IGE), Université Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, IRD, Grenoble, France
- R. Ramsankaran
- Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay, India
- T. J. Reerink
- Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Research (IMAU), Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
- O. Sanchez
- Institut des Géosciences de l'Environnement (IGE), Université Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, IRD, Grenoble, France
- P. A. Stentoft
- Arctic Technology Centre ARTEK, Technical University of Denmark, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark
- S. Singh Kumari
- Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay, India
- W. J. J. van Pelt
- Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
- B. Anderson
- Antarctic Research Centre, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand
- T. Benham
- Scott Polar Research Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- D. Binder
- Central Institute for Meteorology and Geodynamics (ZAMG), Vienna, Austria
- J. A. Dowdeswell
- Scott Polar Research Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- A. Fischer
- Institute for Interdisciplinary Mountain Research, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Innsbruck, Austria
- K. Helfricht
- Institute for Interdisciplinary Mountain Research, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Innsbruck, Austria
- S. Kutuzov
- Laboratory of Glaciology, Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Science, Moscow, Russia
- I. Lavrentiev
- Laboratory of Glaciology, Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Science, Moscow, Russia
- R. McNabb
- Geophysical Institute, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, AK, USA
- G. H. Gudmundsson
- British Antarctic Survey, Natural Environment Research Council, Cambridge, UK
- H. Li
- State Key Laboratory of Cryospheric Sciences, Tian Shan Glaciological Station, CAREERI, CAS, Lanzhou, China
- L. M. Andreassen
- Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (NVE), Oslo, Norway
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-11-949-2017
- Journal volume & issue
-
Vol. 11,
no. 2
pp. 949 – 970
Abstract
Knowledge of the ice thickness distribution of glaciers and ice caps is an important prerequisite for many glaciological and hydrological investigations. A wealth of approaches has recently been presented for inferring ice thickness from characteristics of the surface. With the Ice Thickness Models Intercomparison eXperiment (ITMIX) we performed the first coordinated assessment quantifying individual model performance. A set of 17 different models showed that individual ice thickness estimates can differ considerably – locally by a spread comparable to the observed thickness. Averaging the results of multiple models, however, significantly improved the results: on average over the 21 considered test cases, comparison against direct ice thickness measurements revealed deviations on the order of 10 ± 24 % of the mean ice thickness (1σ estimate). Models relying on multiple data sets – such as surface ice velocity fields, surface mass balance, or rates of ice thickness change – showed high sensitivity to input data quality. Together with the requirement of being able to handle large regions in an automated fashion, the capacity of better accounting for uncertainties in the input data will be a key for an improved next generation of ice thickness estimation approaches.
