MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2060921904 · doi:10.1029/2005jf000395

Radiation transport model for ablation hollows on snowfields

2006· article· en· W2060921904 on OpenAlexaff
T. Tiedje, Kevin Mitchell, Bayo Lau, Anders Ballestad, E. Nodwell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowSnowpackNonlinear systemPhysicsRadiationPerturbation (astronomy)Differential equationPartial differential equationAmplitudeClassical mechanicsMechanicsMeteorologyOpticsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ablation hollows or “suncups” that form on the surface of snowfields in summer are a wonderful example of pattern formation in nature. Suncups reduce the albedo of the snow and set a characteristic length for interaction of wind with the snowpack. They also contain information about the properties of the snow and its ablation rate, which could be extracted if we had a more quantitative understanding of how suncups form. A mathematical model is proposed that explains the shape, size, and dynamical behavior of suncups in terms of the interaction of solar radiation with the snowpack. Using a perturbation method, we derive a nonlinear partial differential equation for the time‐dependent shape of the snow surface from an approximate physical model for the interaction of solar radiation with snow. The resulting equation, which is similar to the Kuramoto‐Sivashinsky equation in fluid mechanics, has solutions with characteristic length and amplitude. We find expressions for the characteristic size of suncups in terms of the spectrally averaged diffusion length of solar radiation in snow. The model correctly describes the shape of suncups, with their spatially ordered patterns of parabolic valleys and V‐shaped ridges. It is also in remarkably good agreement with the observed length scales and growth rates. Depending on the relative values of the coefficients of the nonlinear terms in the differential equation, the suncup patterns can be either stationary in time or chaotic.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations20
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres→Same topicCryospheric studies and observations→French-language works237,207→