MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163527791

Tracking Changes in Buried Melt Freeze Crusts

2009· article· en· W2163527791 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michael A. Smith, Bruce Jamieson

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Snow Science Workshop, Davos 2009, Proceedings · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowGeologyPhysical geographySnowmeltSpring (device)LatitudeAtmospheric sciencesEnvironmental scienceGeomorphologyGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Melt freeze crusts are a frequent occurrence in the mid-latitudes, often forming in the snowcover due to rain or wet snow in the fall and insolation in the spring. Such crusts are frequently found at the bed surface of deep slab avalanches. Although faceting and weakening at the boundaries and in the interior of crusts under low temperature gradients has been documented, few long term systematic observations exist. This omission is potentially important, as an understanding of these processes may improve forecasting the strength of deep crusts. For the past two winter seasons, the University of Calgary Applied Snow and Avalanche Research group (ASARC) has monitored naturally occurring crusts in the Columbia Mountains of Western Canada. Properties such as grain form and size, density, temperature and hardness were observed on a weekly basis. Starting in the 2008-09 field season, the specific surface area (SSA) of three crusts was measured weekly using near infrared digital photography, resulting in 23 observations over two months including the transition to near-isothermal snow, where substantial structural changes were observed. This paper details these and other results.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Snow Science Workshop, Davos 2009, ProceedingsSame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207