Comparing Simulated and Measured Sensible and Latent Heat Fluxes over Snow under a Pine Canopy to Improve an Energy Balance Snowmelt Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract During the second year of the NASA Cold Land Processes Experiment (CLPX), an eddy covariance (EC) system was deployed at the Local Scale Observation Site (LSOS) from mid-February to June 2003. The EC system was located beneath a uniform pine canopy, where the trees are regularly spaced and are of similar age and height. In an effort to evaluate the turbulent flux calculations of an energy balance snowmelt model (SNOBAL), modeled and EC-measured sensible and latent heat fluxes between the snow cover and the atmosphere during this period are presented and compared. Turbulent fluxes comprise a large component of the snow cover energy balance in the premelt and ripening period (March–early May) and therefore control the internal energy content of the snow cover as melt accelerates in late spring. Simulated snow cover depth closely matched measured values (RMS difference 8.3 cm; Nash–Sutcliff model efficiency 0.90), whereas simulated snow cover mass closely matched the few measured values taken during the season. Over the 927-h comparison period using the default model configuration, simulated sensible heat H was within 1 W m−2, latent heat LυE within 4 W m−2, and cumulative sublimation within 3 mm of that measured by the EC system. Differences between EC-measured and simulated fluxes occurred primarily at night. The reduction of the surface layer specification in the model from 25 to 10 cm reduced flux differences between EC-measured and modeled fluxes to 0 W m−2 for H, 2 W m−2 for LυE, and 1 mm for sublimation. When only daytime fluxes were compared, differences were further reduced to 1 W m−2 for LυE and <1 mm for sublimation. This experiment shows that in addition to traditional mass balance methods, EC-measured fluxes can be used to diagnose the performance of a snow cover energy balance model. It also demonstrates the use of eddy covariance methods for measuring heat and mass fluxes from snow covers at a low-wind, below-canopy site.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".