MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082003047 · doi:10.1175/jhm443.1

Snow Mass over North America: Observations and Results from the Second Phase of the Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project

2005· article· en· W2082003047 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Allan Frei, Ross Brown, James A. Miller, David A. Robinson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hydrometeorology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSnowpackSnowEnvironmental scienceCoupled model intercomparison projectClimatologyAtmospheric sciencesClimate modelWater equivalentMeteorologyClimate changeGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Eighteen global atmospheric general circulation models (AGCMs) participating in the second phase of the Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project (AMIP-2) are evaluated for their ability to simulate the observed spatial and temporal variability in snow mass, or water equivalent (SWE), over North America during the AMIP-2 period (1979–95). The evaluation is based on a new gridded SWE dataset developed from objective analysis of daily snow depth observations from Canada and the United States with snow density estimated from a simple snowpack model. Most AMIP-2 models simulate the seasonal timing and the relative spatial patterns of continental-scale SWE fairly well. However, there is a tendency to overestimate the rate of ablation during spring, and significant between-model variability is found in every aspect of the simulations, and at every spatial scale analyzed. For example, on the continental scale, the peak monthly SWE integrated over the North American continent in AMIP-2 models varies between ±50% of the observed value of ∼1500 km3. The volume of water in the snowpack, and the magnitudes of model errors, are significant in comparison to major fluxes in the continental water balance. It also appears that the median result from the suite of models tends to do a better job of estimating climatological mean features than any individual model. Year-to-year variations in large-scale SWE are only weakly correlated to observed variations, indicating that sea surface temperatures (specified from observations as boundary conditions) do not drive interannual variations of SWE in these models. These results have implications for simulations of the large-scale hydrologic cycle and for climate change impact assessments.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score0.366

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 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

Citations50
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HydrometeorologySame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207