MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982825388 · doi:10.5589/m05-021

Spatiotemporal variations in land surface albedo across Canada from MODIS observations

2005· article· en· W1982825388 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Andrew Davidson, Shusen Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Remote Sensing · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTundraAlbedo (alchemy)Environmental scienceGrasslandModerate-resolution imaging spectroradiometerPhysical geographyLand coverVegetation (pathology)GeographyAtmospheric sciencesClimatologyRemote sensingSatelliteLand useArcticEcologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A detailed knowledge of spatiotemporal variations in surface albedo is crucial if surface-atmosphere energy exchanges are to be accurately represented in climate models. Satellite observations can provide this information. This study uses moderate resolution imaging spectroradiometer (MODIS) data to investigate how summer and winter albedos, and the intra-annual variation in albedo, vary across the Canadian landscape. We show that (i) albedos generally decrease as one moves from grassland to broadleaved forest to needleleaved and mixed forest; (ii) the effects of snow on albedo vary among cover types; (iii) the largest intra-annual albedo variations occur over grasslands, cropland, and tundra; (iv) significant differences in albedo occur not only among broadleaved forest, needleleaf forest, grassland, and tundra, but also among their various canopy types (e.g., open versus closed canopies); and (v) land cover types sharing similar albedos in winter do not necessarily share similar albedos in summer. These trends are caused by differences in canopy structure and are supported to varying degrees by other in situ and remote sensing studies. These results suggest that the use of overly general land cover classes (e.g., needleleaved forest, grassland, tundra) in climate models will ignore important local-scale spatial variations in surface albedo.

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)0.000
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 score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations26
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Remote SensingSame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207