arrow
Return

Best practices in software development for robust and reproducible geoscientific models based on insights from the Global Carbon Budget's dynamic vegetation models

delete2026-03-25
delete0
delete
OA
AI
K
Konstantin Gregor *
B
Benjamin F. Meyer
T
Tillmann Gaida
V
Victor Justo Vasquez
K
Karina Bett-Williams
M
Matthew Forrest
J
João Paulo Darela-Filho
S
Sam S. Rabin
M
Marcos Longo
J
Joe R. Melton
J
Johan Nord
P
Peter Anthoni
V
Vladislav Bastrikov
T
Thomas Colligan
C
Christine Delire
M
Michael C. Dietze
G
G. C. Hurtt
A
Akihiko Ito
L
Lasse Torben Keetz
J
Jürgen Knauer
J
Johannes Köster
T
Tzu-Shun Lin
L
Lei Ma
M
Marie Minvielle
S
Stefan Olin
S
Sebastian Ostberg
H
Hao Shi
R
Reiner Schnur
Q
Qing Sun
P
Peter Thornton
A
Anja Rammig
DOI:10.5194/gmd-19-2407-2026delete
deleteOriginal
deleteOriginal request for help
deleteShare
deleteSave
Abstract

Abstract

En 中文
Computational models play an increasingly vital role in scientific research by enabling the numerical simulation of complex processes. Such models are also fundamental in geosciences. For instance, they offer critical insights into the impacts of global change on the Earth system today and in the future. Beyond their value as research tools, models are also software products and should therefore adhere to certain established software engineering standards. However, scientists are rarely trained as software developers, which can lead to potential deficiencies in software quality like unreadable, inefficient, or erroneous code. The complexity of models, coupled with their integration into broader workflows, also often makes it challenging to reproduce results, evaluate processes, and build upon them.In this paper, we review the state and current practices of the development processes of the state-of-the-art land surface models used by the Global Carbon Budget. We combine the experience of modelers from the respective research groups with the expertise of software engineers from tech companies to outline key principles and tools for improving software quality in research. We explore four main areas: (1) model testing and validation, (2) scientific, technical, and user documentation, (3) version control, continuous integration, and code review, and (4) the portability and reproducibility of workflows.Our review reveals that while modeling communities are incorporating many best practices, significant room for improvement remains in areas such as automated testing, automated documentation, and reproducibility. Therefore, we here identify and promote essential software engineering practices, including numerous examples of practices from within the community that can serve as guidelines for other models and could help streamline processes across the entire community.We conclude with an open-source example implementation of these principles, demonstrating portable and reproducible data flows, a continuous integration setup, and web-based visualizations. This example may serve as a practical resource for model developers, users, and all scientists engaged in scientific programming.
Keywords:
EARTH SYSTEM MODEL
ENVIRONMENT SIMULATOR JULES
SOURCE COMMUNITY SUCCESSOR
SURFACE SCHEME CLASS
LAND-USE CHANGE
DATA ASSIMILATION
NITROGEN-CYCLE
CO2 EMISSIONS
CLASSIC V1.0
VERSION

Journal

Geoscientific Model Development cover
Geoscientific Model Development
IF:
4.9
Papers:
4.0K
Citations:
2.4W

Organization

P
potsdam institut fur klimafolgenforschung
Scholars:
2.1K
Papers: 2.0K
Citations: 2
K
karlsruhe institute of technology
Scholars:
1.9W
Papers: 1.4W
Citations: 23
B
boston university
Scholars:
3.7W
Papers: 3.2W
Citations: 67
T
technical university of munich
Scholars:
6.3K
Papers: 2.5K
Citations: 1
U
Universite de Toulouse
Scholars:
824
Papers: 397
Citations: 0
M
meteo france
Scholars:
1.4K
Papers: 944
Citations: 4
E
environment & climate change canada
Scholars:
152
Papers: 78
Citations: 0
U
university of maryland college park
Scholars:
383
Papers: 264
Citations: 0
 
 lund university
Scholars:
1.3K
Papers: 593
Citations: 0
N
national aeronautics & space administration (nasa)
Scholars:
3.1W
Papers: 2.6W
Citations: 46
U
university of tokyo
Scholars:
5.4K
Papers: 2.2K
Citations: 1
U
university of exeter
Scholars:
2.2K
Papers: 1.2K
Citations: 0
M
met office - uk
Scholars:
3.1K
Papers: 3.0K
Citations: 1
U
university of duisburg essen
Scholars:
2.3K
Papers: 826
Citations: 0
U
united states department of energy (doe)
Scholars:
11.2W
Papers: 9.6W
Citations: 246
University System of Maryland cover
University System of Maryland
Scholars:
6.4W
Papers: 5.6W
Citations: 113
N
nasa goddard space flight center
Scholars:
601
Papers: 336
Citations: 4
U
university of technology sydney
Scholars:
1.6W
Papers: 2.0W
Citations: 25
I
instituto nacional de pesquisas espaciais (inpe)
Scholars:
3.0K
Papers: 2.1K
Citations: 3
U
University of Bern
Scholars:
3.9W
Papers: 3.1W
Citations: 4.8W
U
University of Oslo
Scholars:
3.0K
Papers: 1.3K
Citations: 0
C
chinese academy of sciences
Scholars:
55.3W
Papers: 44.6W
Citations: 704
researcher View more organizations