Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Blowing snow transports and sublimates a substantial portion of the seasonal snowfall in the prairies of western Canada. Snow redistribution is an important feature of prairie hydrology as deep snowdrifts provide a source of meltwater to replenish ponds and generate streamflow in this dry region. The spatial distribution of snow water equivalent in the spring is therefore of great interest. A test of the distributed and aggregated modelling strategies for blowing snow transport and sublimation was conducted at the St. Denis National Wildlife Area in the rolling, internally drained prairie pothole region east of Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada. A LiDAR‐based DEM and aerial photograph‐based vegetation cover map were available for this region. A coupled complex windflow and blowing snow model was run with 262,144 6 m × 6 m grid cells to produce spatially distributed estimates of seasonal blowing snow transport and sublimation. The calculation was then aggregated to seven landscape units that represented the major influences of surface roughness, topography and fetch on blowing snow transport and sublimation. Both the distributed and aggregated simulations predicted similar end‐of‐winter snow water equivalent with substantial redistribution of blowing snow from exposed sparsely vegetated sites across topographic drainage divides to the densely vegetated pothole wetlands. Both simulations also agreed well with snow survey observations. While the distributed calculations provide a fascinating and detailed visual image of the interaction of complex landscapes and blowing snow redistribution and sublimation, it is clear that blowing snow transport and sublimation calculations can be successfully aggregated to the spatial scale of the major landscape units in this environment. This means that meso and macroscale hydrological models can represent blowing snow redistribution successfully in the prairies. Copyright © 2009 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".