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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.378
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations216
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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