Assessment and Improvement of Snow Datasets over the United States
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Improved knowledge of the cryosphere state is paramount for continued model development and for accurate estimates of fresh water supply. This work focuses on evaluation and potential improvements of current snow datasets over the United States. Snow in mountainous terrain is most difficult to quantify due to the slope, aspect, and remote nature of the environment. Due to the difficulty of measuring snow quantities in the mountains, the initial study creates a new method to upscale point measurements to area averages for comparison to initial snow quantities in numerical weather prediction models. The new method is robust and cross validation of the method results in a relatively low mean absolute error of 18% for snow depth (SD). Operational models at the National Centers for Environmental Prediction which use Air Force Weather Agency (AFWA) snow depth data for initialization were found to underestimate snow depth by 77% on average. Larger error is observed in areas that are more mountainous. Additionally, SD data from the Canadian Meteorological Center, which is used for some model evaluations, performed similarly to models initialized with AFWA data. The use of constant snow density for snow water equivalent (SWE) initialization for models which utilize AFWA data exacerbates poor SD performance with dismal SWE estimates. A remedy for the constant snow density utilized in NCEP snow initializations is presented in the next study which creates a new snow density parameterization (SNODEN). SNODEN is evaluated against observations and performance is compared with offline land surface models from the National Land Data Assimilation System (NLDAS) as well as the Snow Data Assimilation System (SNODAS). SNODEN has less error overall and reproduces the temporal evolution of snow density better than all evaluated products. SNODEN is also able to estimate snow density for up to 10 snow layers which may be useful for land surface models as well as conversion of remotely-sensed SD to SWE. Due to the poor performance of previously evaluated snow products, the last study evaluates openly-available remotely-sensed snow datasets to better understand the strengths and weaknesses of current global SWE datasets. A new SWE dataset developed at the University of Arizona is used for evaluation. While the UA SWE data has already been stringently evaluated, confidence is further increased by favorable comparison of UA snow cover, created from UA SWE, with multiple snow cover extent products. Poor performance of remotely-sensed SWE is still evident even in products which combine ground observations with remotely-sensed data. Grid boxes that are predominantly tree covered have a mean absolute difference up to 87% of mean SWE and SWE less than 5 cm is routinely overestimated by 100% or more. Additionally, snow covered area derived from global SWE datasets have mean absolute errors of 20%-154% of mean snow covered area.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».