Estimating precipitation phase using a psychrometric energy balance method
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Precipitation phase is fundamental to a catchment's hydrological response to precipitation events. Phase is particularly variable over time and space in the Canadian Rockies where snowfall or rainfall can occur any month of the year. Phase is controlled by the microphysics of the falling hydrometeor, but microphysical calculations require detailed atmospheric information that is often lacking for hydrological analyses. In hydrology, there have been many methods developed to estimate phase, but most are regionally calibrated, and many depend on air temperature ( T a ) and use daily time steps. Phase is not only related to T a , but to other meteorological variables, and precipitation events are temporally dynamic, adding uncertainty to the use of daily indices to estimate phase. To better predict precipitation phase, the psychrometric energy balance of a falling hydrometeor was calculated and used to develop a method to estimate precipitation phase. High quality precipitation phase and meteorological data were observed at multiple elevations in a small Canadian Rockies catchment, Marmot Creek Research Basin, at 15‐min intervals over several years to develop and test the method. The results of the psychrometric energy balance method were compared to phase observations, to other methods over varying time scales and seasons and at varying elevations and topographic exposures. The results indicate that the psychrometric energy balance method performs much better than T a index methods and that this improvement, and the accuracy of the psychrometric energy balance method, increases as the time step of calculation decreases. 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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 it