MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131373907 · doi:10.1175/2010jtecha1508.1

A New Low-Cost, Stand-Alone Sensor System for Snow Monitoring

2010· article· en· W2131373907 on OpenAlexaff
Andrés Varhola, Jens Wawerla, Markus Weiler, Nicholas C. Coops, Daniel Bewley, Younes Alila

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowpackSnowEnvironmental scienceSuiteFlexibility (engineering)Range (aeronautics)MeteorologySnowmeltRemote sensingComputer scienceGeologyGeographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Monitoring continuous changes in snowpack dynamics and its meteorological drivers is critical for understanding key aspects of water resources, climate variability, and ecology. While manual snow surveys have traditionally been used to evaluate snow processes, their high costs and discrete measurements can lead to biased estimations of accumulation and ablation rates. Ultrasonic range sensors offer an alternative to continuously monitor snow depth but their widespread employment has been limited because of high prices. This paper describes the development of an inexpensive prototype ultrasonic sensor suite characterized by a ready-to-use stand-alone design and flexibility to incorporate additional meteorological instruments. The performance of 48 units was tested during a winter season in central British Columbia, recording snow depth and air temperature data consistent with those from nearby weather stations and manual measurements. Despite a relatively small underestimation of snow depth due to known, repairable reasons, the sensor system demonstrated reliability for research and operations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations28
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Atmospheric and Oceanic TechnologySame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207