Spatial and temporal variation of bulk snow properties in northern borealand tundra environments based on extensive field measurements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. An extensive in situ data set of snow depth, snow water equivalent (SWE), and snow density collected in support of the European Space Agency (ESA) SnowSAR-2 airborne campaigns in northern Finland during the winter of 2011–2012 is presented (ESA Earth Observation Campaigns data 2000–2016). The suitability of the in situ measurement protocol to provide an accurate reference for the simultaneous airborne SAR (synthetic aperture radar) data products over different land cover types was analysed in the context of spatial scale, sample spacing, and uncertainty. The analysis was executed by applying autocorrelation analysis and root mean square difference (RMSD) error estimations. The results showed overall higher variability for all the three bulk snow parameters over tundra, open bogs and lakes (due to wind processes); however, snow depth tended to vary over shorter distances in forests (due to snow–vegetation interactions). Sample spacing/sample size had a statistically significant effect on the mean snow depth over all land cover types. Analysis executed for 50, 100, and 200 m transects revealed that in most cases less than five samples were adequate to describe the snow depth mean with RMSD < 5 %, but for land cover with high overall variability an indication of increased sample size of 1.5–3 times larger was gained depending on the scale and the desired maximum RMSD. Errors for most of the land cover types reached ∼ 10 % if only three measurements were considered. The collected measurements, which are available via the ESA website upon registration, compose an exceptionally large manually collected snow data set in Scandinavian taiga and tundra environments. This information represents a valuable contribution to the snow research community and can be applied to various snow studies.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 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".