MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2337429091 · doi:10.1177/0309133315625863

Dendrogeomorphic reconstruction of snow avalanche regime and triggering weather conditions

2016· article· en· W2337429091 on OpenAlexaff
Jean‐Philippe Martin, Daniel Germaın

Bibliographic record

VenueProgress in Physical Geography Earth and Environment · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowpackSnowEnvironmental scienceLogistic regressionMeteorologyRegressionClimatologyGeographyStatisticsGeologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While dendrogeomorphology has been recognized as a useful tool to identify past avalanche activity, there is only a handful of papers that focus on the assessment of weather or climatic triggers of tree-ring reconstructed avalanche events. This paper compares the potential of logistic regression and classification tree algorithms to highlight weather scenarios responsible for the occurrence of high-magnitude avalanche activity in the Presidential Range of the White Mountains, New Hampshire (USA). Our tree-ring procedure improves the modern GD- I t threshold with the implementation of a second criteria based on the Moran index. 450 trees sampled in seven different avalanche paths allowed us to reconstruct 45 avalanches that occurred during 19 different years for the period 1936–2012. The results show that while statistically significant, the logistic regression models are less accurate than classification trees to assess avalanche activity based on annual and monthly weather variables. Moreover, even if snow related covariates are located at the root node of every classification tree model, the addition of temperature and wind predictors increases their robustness. This suggests that high-magnitude avalanches in the Presidential Range not only respond to snow, but also to atmospheric conditions responsible for the creation of weak layers within the snowpack.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.329
Threshold uncertainty score0.317

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.189 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations19
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProgress in Physical Geography Earth and EnvironmentSame topicLandslides and related hazardsFrench-language works237,207