MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112706015 · doi:10.1002/hyp.9931

Observations of late winter Canadian tundra snow cover properties

2013· article· en· W2112706015 on OpenAlexaffabout
Andrew Rees, Michael English, Chris Derksen, Peter Toose, Arvids Silis

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrological Processes · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTundraSnowEnvironmental sciencePermafrostSnow lineTerrainSnow fieldWater equivalentPrecipitationPhysical geographyClimatologyForcing (mathematics)SnowmeltSnow coverAtmospheric sciencesArcticGeologyMeteorologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Tundra snow cover is important to monitor as it influences local, regional, and global‐scale surface water balance, energy fluxes, as well as ecosystem and permafrost dynamics. Observations are already showing a decrease in spring snow cover duration at high latitudes, but the impact of changing winter season temperature and precipitation on variables such as snow water equivalent (SWE) is less clear. A multi‐year project was initiated in 2004 with the objective to quantify tundra snow cover properties over multiple years at a scale appropriate for comparison with satellite passive microwave remote sensing data and regional climate and hydrological models. Data collected over seven late winter field campaigns (2004 to 2010) show the patterns of snow depth and SWE are strongly influenced by terrain characteristics. Despite the spatial heterogeneity of snow cover, several inter‐annual consistencies were identified. A regional average density of 0.293 g/cm 3 was derived and shown to have little difference with individual site densities when deriving SWE from snow depth measurements. The inter‐annual patterns of SWE show that despite variability in meteorological forcing, there were many consistent ratios between the SWE on flat tundra and the SWE on lakes, plateaus, and slopes. A summary of representative inter‐annual snow stratigraphy from different terrain categories is also presented. © 2013 Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada. Hydrological Processes. © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

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)0.0090.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.148 · 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

Citations39
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHydrological ProcessesSame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207