MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109511591 · doi:10.3189/172756411797252266

Recent fluctuations of meteorological and snow conditions in Japanese mountains

2011· article· en· W2109511591 on OpenAlexaff
Satoru Yamaguchi, Osamu Abe, Sento Nakai, Atsushi Sato

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Glaciology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsStudents on Ice
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowPrecipitationAltitude (triangle)Water equivalentClimatologyEnvironmental scienceAir temperatureAtmospheric sciencesSnow lineSurface air temperatureMean valuePhysical geographyElevation (ballistics)Snow coverMeteorologyGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstarct Meteorological data from mountainous areas of Japan have been collected by the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention (NIED) for almost 20 years. The collected long-period data indicate that neither a notable increase in mean winter temperature nor a reduction in snow depth has occurred in these areas. The maximum snow depth, SD max , and maximum snow water equivalent, SWE max , show similar fluctuation trends, although with large year-to-year variations in value and a larger fluctuation range for SWE max than for SD max . This result suggests that monitoring of only SD max in mountainous areas is not sufficient for understanding the quantitative fluctuation of water resources originating from snow. The SD max fluctuation trends in mountainous areas sometimes differ from those in flatland areas because mountain SD max depends more on winter precipitation than on mean winter air temperature, whereas the opposite is true for flatlands. In addition, the dependence ratio of SD max on fluctuations in winter precipitation changes with altitude because the distributions of precipitation with air temperature change with altitude.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.180 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations48
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of GlaciologySame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207