Interrelationships between MODIS/Terra remotely sensed snow cover and the hydrometeorology of the Quesnel River Basin, British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. A spatial filter (SF) method is adopted to reduce the cloud coverage from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) 8-day snow products (MOD10A2) between 2000–2007 in the Quesnel River Basin (QRB) of British Columbia, Canada. A threshold of k = 2 cm of snow depth measurements at four in-situ observation stations in the QRB are used to evaluate the accuracy of MODIS snow products MOD10A1, MOD10A2, and SF. Using the MOD10A2 and the SF, the relationships between snow ablation, snow cover extent (SCE), snow cover fraction (SCF), streamflow and climate variability are assessed. Based on our results we are able to draw several interesting conclusions. Firstly, the SF method reduces the average cloud coverage in the QRB from 15% for MOD10A2 to 9%. Secondly, the SF increases the overall accuracy (OA) based on the threshold k = 2 cm by about 2% compared to MOD10A2 and by about 10% compared to MOD10A1 at higher elevations. The OA for the four in-situ stations decreases with elevation with 93.1%, 87.9%, 84.0%, and 76.5% at 777 m, 1265 m, 1460 m, and 1670 m, respectively. Thirdly, an aggregated 1°C rise in average air temperature during spring leads to a 10-day advance in reaching 50% SCF (SCF50%) in the QRB. The correlation coefficient between normalized SCE of the SF and normalized streamflow is −0.84 (p<0.001) for snow ablation seasons. There is a 32-day time lag for snow ablation to impact the streamflow the strongest at the basin outlet. The linear correlation coefficient between SCF50% and 50% normalized accumulated runoff (R50%) attains 0.82 (p<0.01). This clearly demonstrates the strong links that exist between the SCF depletion and the hydrology of this sub-boreal, mountainous watershed.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".