MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969398376 · doi:10.1002/hyp.7246

Snow ablation energy balance in a dead forest stand

2009· article· en· W1969398376 on OpenAlexafffund
Sarah Boon

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrological Processes · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersNatural Resources Canada
KeywordsSnowEnvironmental scienceInterceptionSnowpackCanopy interceptionAblationCanopyEnergy balanceAtmospheric sciencesHydrology (agriculture)ThroughfallEcologyGeologyGeomorphologySoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Forest disturbance has a significant impact on hydrology due to its effect on the forest canopy, which is important for precipitation interception, transpiration, site micrometeorology, and snow accumulation and ablation. This study examines the impact of mountain pine beetle infestation and subsequent forest death on snow ablation. Dead stands experience needle loss and canopy reduction due mainly to the loss of small branches and stems, which has a subsequent impact on micrometeorological conditions. Ablation is driven largely by incoming short‐wave radiation, which in dead stands is greater than in alive stands, but does not reach that available in clearcuts. Long‐wave radiation emission in dead stands is lower than that in alive stands, reducing its contribution to snowpack warming and ablation. Turbulent flux contributions to snow ablation are limited in forest stands relative to clearcuts, although they are slightly greater in dead than alive stands due to the more open forest structure. Additional studies are required to refine the basic energy balance model and incorporate all processes affecting the snow ablation energy balance. Copyright © 2009 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations115
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHydrological ProcessesSame topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsFrench-language works237,207