Surface Energy Balance of the Western and Central Canadian Subarctic: Variations in the Energy Balance among Five Major Terrain Types
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, the surface energy balance of 10 sites in the western and central Canadian subarctic is examined. Each research site is classified into one of five terrain types (lake, wetland, shrub tundra, upland tundra, and coniferous forest) using dominant vegetation type as an indicator of surface cover. Variations in the mean summertime values (15 June-25 August) of the energy balance partitioning, Bowen ratio (), Priestley-Taylor alpha (), and surface saturation deficit (D o ) are compared within and among terrain types. A clear correspondence between the energy balance characteristics and terrain type is found. In addition, an evaporative continuum from relatively wet to relatively dry is observed among terrain types. The shallow lake and wetland sites are relatively wet with high Q E /Q* (latent heat flux/net radiation), high , low , and low D o values. In contrast, the upland tundra and forest sites are relatively dry with low Q E /Q*, low , high , and high D o values.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".