Geometric calculation of view factors for stream surface radiation modelling in the presence of riparian forest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many efforts to model stream temperature by using an energy budget approach have not accounted for view factors in modelling stream surface radiative exchanges, used informal approaches for computing them, or relied on calibration, which is not applicable for prediction at unmonitored sites or for predicting the effects of changes in riparian vegetation. In this paper, equations are derived for calculating view factors on the basis of geometric considerations for streams with and without riparian forest. The solutions can accommodate vegetation overhanging the stream surface. Example calculations illustrate the substantial variability of view factors across the stream width, which has implications for the estimation of view factors from point-scale radiation measurements over the stream surface, and the important influence of overhanging vegetation on view factors for narrow streams. View factors computed from the geometric model agreed well with view factors computed from hemispherical photography for streams ranging from 1 to almost 50 m wide, indicating that the model appears to be reasonably robust to deviations from the simplified geometry assumed by the model. In addition to their use in modelling stream surface energy exchanges, the solutions could also be adapted for application to energy balance and microclimate modelling in linear forest openings, such as seismic lines used in oil and gas exploration. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".