MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1484124851 · doi:10.1175/jhm-d-14-0223.1

Representation of Snow in the Canadian Seasonal to Interannual Prediction System. Part I: Initialization

2015· article· en· W1484124851 on OpenAlexaffabout
Reinel Sospedra‐Alfonso, Lawrence Mudryk, William J. Merryfield, Chris Derksen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hydrometeorology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowInitializationEnvironmental scienceClimatologySnowmeltNorthern HemisphereData assimilationSnow coverForcing (mathematics)MeteorologyAtmospheric sciencesGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The ability of the Canadian Seasonal to Interannual Prediction System (CanSIPS) to provide realistic forecast initial conditions for snow cover is assessed using in situ measurements and gridded snow analyses. Forecast initial conditions for snow in CanCM3 and CanCM4 employed by CanSIPS are determined by the response of the Canadian Land Surface Scheme (CLASS) used in both models to forcing from model atmospheric fields constrained by assimilation of 6-hourly reanalysis data. These snow initial conditions are found to be representative of the daily climatology of snow water equivalent (SWE) as well as interannual variations in maximum SWE and the timing of snow onset and snowmelt observed at eight in situ measurement sites located across Canada. The level of this agreement is similar to that of three independent gridded snow analyses (MERRA, the European Space Agency’s GlobSnow, and an offline forced version of CLASS). Total Northern Hemisphere snow mass generated by the CanSIPS initialization procedure is larger for both models (especially CanCM3) than in MERRA, mostly because of higher SWE in regions of common snow cover. Globally, the interannual variability of initial SWE is found to correlate highly with that of MERRA in locations with appreciable snow. These initial values are compared to SWE in freely running CanCM3 and CanCM4 simulations produced without data assimilation of atmospheric fields. Differences in climatological SWE relative to MERRA are similar in the freely running and assimilating CanCM3 and CanCM4 simulations, suggesting that inherent model biases are a major contributor to biases in CanSIPS snow initial conditions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.342
Threshold uncertainty score0.952

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.212 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HydrometeorologySame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207