Snow Mass over North America: Observations and Results from the Second Phase of the Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".