MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127796810 · doi:10.3189/172756409787769726

Calculation of sensible-heat flux over a melting ice surface using simple climate data and daily measurements of ablation

2009· article· en· W2127796810 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Roger J. Braithwaite

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Glaciology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Manchester
KeywordsSensible heatHeat fluxWind speedEnvironmental scienceClimatologyHeat transfer coefficientGreenland ice sheetFlux (metallurgy)GlacierDimensionless quantityHeat transferGeologyAtmospheric sciencesMeteorologyThermodynamicsMaterials scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Sensible-heat flux is obviously important for glacier ablation but is difficult to measure routinely. Sensible-heat flux can be estimated from wind-speed and temperature data using a dimensionless heat-transfer coefficient. Values of the heat-transfer coefficient are evaluated for six sites by correlating measured melt energy with a wind–temperature variable (product of daily mean wind speed, temperature and mean atmospheric pressure for the altitude in question). Data are available for short periods from two sites in Arctic Canada and two sites in North Greenland, and for hundreds of days of record at Nordbogletscher and Qamanârssûp sermia in South and West Greenland, respectively. Average transfer coefficients for four out of the six sites are close to 0.003, which is in reasonable agreement with values reported elsewhere, while larger values of 0.0047 and 0.0057 are found at the other two sites. Heat-transfer coefficients are also estimated on a monthly basis for the two long records, and substantial variations are found, suggesting that the method should not be used for <20–30 days of data. The present study is based on manually observed ablation and climate data, but the approach could be updated to use data from automatic recording stations using modern sensors.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.252

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.196
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.153 · 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 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

Citations40
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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