A geospatial model to determine patterns of ice cover breakup along the Slave River
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spring floods have become less frequent along the Slave River and Slave River Delta. As a result, prolonged dry periods have occurred leading to an influx of invasive vegetation more tolerant to dry conditions (e.g., willows). Ice cover breakup and ice jamming can be important mechanisms in river flooding. A clear understanding of spatial and temporal patterns of the spring ice cover breakup along the Slave River could identify possible causes of reduced flood magnitude and frequency in the Slave River Delta. Few attempts have been made to examine the patterns of ice cover breakup along this river. A geospatial model has been introduced in this study to pinpoint the most likely areas of breakup initiation and persistent ice and ice cover at the end of the breakup period along the river. Relatively narrow river sections are responsible for initiation of breakup and relatively wide sections of the river have a strong predisposition for persistent ice along the Slave River. Daily time series of MODIS satellite images acquired from different years were used to examine the spatial and temporal patterns of ice breakup along the Slave River. In addition to geomorphological influence, air temperature and flow conditions also have strong impacts on the spatial and temporal patterns of the ice cover breakup.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".