Minutes of meeting at EGU 2016, April 2014, Vienna

[2016-04-21 Thu]

About a dozen people participated. Basile de Fleurian presented a project overview. Mauro Werder explained details about the individual experiments. Most of the discussion centred around the model setups. (I (Mauro) also included here some bits of discussion I had after the meeting.)

Model run setups

  • Merge experiments A&B. Instruct to fit on low and high melt scenario (A3, A5). If needed by the model, allow to use two parameter sets for low and high input. This also means that there is no need to refer to channelised vs distributed drainage at all.
  • Provide setup for flow-line models: width function, width integrated discharge, figure out how to do moulins.
  • Provide questionnaires for participants:
    • one for the whole exercise. Fields: model type and intent, programming language, remarks.
    • one for each model run. Fields: remarks, model run time, needed degrees of freedom.
  • Interest of ocean modellers for a tide-water example glacier. But was decided to not extent the current suite of experiments.

Model outputs

  • Specified NetCDF file format
  • Effective pressure
  • Mass conservation:
    • frontal discharge
    • amount of water stored in the system
  • If someone wants to submit results for different parameters, then these should be submitted as different test-sets, e.g. Mauro-1, Mauro-2, etc.


Participants were happy about the proposed time-line:

  • Beta-testing this Summer (2016).
  • Official call for participation in August 2016.
  • Results of participants to be submitted by end of November 2016.
  • Winter 2017: figuring out an evaluation and comparison strategy and compilation of results.
  • Presentation of the results at EGU 2017 and a splinter meeting to discuss the results and the planned publication.
  • Publication submission in the Summer 2017.

Further steps

  • Participants/interested parties send an email; one low-volume email list for interested parties; one list for experiment participators.


  • It was suggested to rename the project to "SHIP" or similar. (renamed to `SHMIP` [2016-07-05 Tue])
  • Discussed that this intercomparison does not aim at assessing model correctness (this is assumed) but at a providing qualitative comparison between models.