MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023477628 · doi:10.2166/nh.2011.074

Synthesis of incoming shortwave radiation for hydrological simulation

2011· article· en· W2023477628 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kevin Shook, John W. Pomeroy

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrology research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
KeywordsShortwave radiationShortwaveEnvironmental scienceSnowmeltClimatologyProxy (statistics)MeteorologyRadiationSnowWater cycleAtmospheric sciencesRadiative transferGeographyGeologyStatisticsPhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past decade, measurements of incoming shortwave radiation and of its proxy, daily bright sunshine hours, have become scarce in western Canada and elsewhere. As these data are critical for computing net radiation for snowmelt, evaporation, soil thaw and other components of the hydrological cycle, other means to estimate incoming shortwave radiation are needed. National Centers for Environmental Prediction and North American Regional Reanalysis atmospheric model reanalysis estimates of daily incoming shortwave radiation (Qsi), as well as the results of simplified semi-empirical calculations, were compared with measurements to determine their usefulness for hydrological calculations. It was found that all of the daily estimates show considerable bias and scatter compared with measurements. The best estimated values were produced by the semi-empirical Annandale method, particularly for simulations over the period of spring snowmelt. As many models require hourly radiation data, a method is presented for rescaling simulated daily Qsi data to the hourly values required.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.003

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 head0.187
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations36
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHydrology researchSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207