Large‐scale mass balance effects of blowing snow and surface sublimation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the effects of surface sublimation and blowing snow on the surface mass balance on a global and basin scale using the European Centre for Medium‐Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) Re‐Analysis (ERA15) data at a resolution of 2.5° that span the years 1979–1993. The combined processes of surface and blowing snow sublimation are estimated to remove 29 mm yr −1 snow‐water equivalent (swe) over Antarctica, disposing about 17 to 20% of its annual precipitation. In the Northern Hemisphere, these processes are generally less important in continental areas than over the frozen Arctic Ocean, where surface and blowing snow sublimation deplete upward of 100 mm yr −1 swe. Areas with frequent blowing snow episodes, such as the coastal regions of Antarctica and the Arctic Ocean, are prone to a mass transport >100 Mg m −1 yr −1 . Although important locally, values of the divergence of mass through wind redistribution are generally 2 orders of magnitude less than surface and blowing snow sublimation when evaluated over large areas. For the entire Mackenzie River Basin of Canada, surface sublimation remains the dominant sink of mass as it removes 29 mm yr −1 swe, or about 7% of the watershed's annual precipitation. Although the first of its kind, this study provides only a first‐order estimate of the contribution of surface sublimation and blowing snow to the surface mass balance because of limitations with the data set and some uncertainties in the blowing snow process.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".