MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169880369 · doi:10.1029/2000jd900149

Prairie and arctic areal snow cover mass balance using a blowing snow model

2000· article· en· W2169880369 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John W. Pomeroy, L. Li

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowEnvironmental scienceSnow fieldSublimation (psychology)Atmospheric sciencesArcticSnowmeltWind speedSnow coverClimatologyMeteorologyGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Algorithms to calculate the threshold wind speed and the effect of exposed vegetation on saltation and to describe vertical profiles of humidity in blowing snow, permit the calculation of point blowing snow transport and sublimation fluxes using standard meteorological and landcover data or simple interfaces with climate models. Blowing snow transport and sublimation fluxes can be upscaled to calculate open environment snow accumulation by accounting for their variability over open snow fields, increase in transport and sublimation with fetch, and the effect of exposed vegetation on partitioning the shear stress available to drive transport. Blowing snow fluxes scaled in this manner were used to calculate snow mass balance and to simulate seasonal snow accumulation at a southern Saskatchewan prairie and an arctic site. Field measurements at these sites indicated that from 48% to 58% of snowfall was removed by blowing snow before melt began. Simulations suggest that the ratios of snow removed and sublimated by blowing snow to that transported were 2∶1 and 1∶1 at the prairie and arctic sites respectively. The resulting methodology was capable of estimating winter season mass balances for these snowpacks that compared well with snowfall and snow accumulation measurements.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.178

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations216
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207