MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2588092525 · doi:10.1175/jhm-d-16-0153.1

Evaluation of CLASS Snow Simulation over Eastern Canada

2017· article· en· W2588092525 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Diana Verseghy, Ross Brown, Libo Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hydrometeorology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsOuranosEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersEnvironment CanadaUniversité du Québec à Montréal
KeywordsSnowEnvironmental scienceAlbedo (alchemy)ClimatologyPrecipitationForcing (mathematics)SnowpackAtmospheric sciencesMeteorologyGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Canadian Land Surface Scheme (CLASS), version 3.6.1, was run offline for the period 1990–2011 over a domain centered on eastern Canada, driven by atmospheric forcing data dynamically downscaled from ERA-Interim using the Canadian Regional Climate Model. The precipitation inputs were adjusted to replicate the monthly average precipitation reported in the CRU observational database. The simulated fractional snow cover and the surface albedo were evaluated using NOAA Interactive Multisensor Snow and Ice Mapping System and MODIS data, and the snow water equivalent was evaluated using CMC, Global Snow Monitoring for Climate Research (GlobSnow), and Hydro-Québec products. The modeled fractional snow cover agreed well with the observational estimates. The albedo of snow-covered areas showed a bias of up to −0.15 in boreal forest regions, owing to neglect of subgrid-scale lakes in the simulation. In June, conversely, there was a positive albedo bias in the remaining snow-covered areas, likely caused by neglect of impurities in the snow. The validation of the snow water equivalent was complicated by the fact that the three observation-based datasets differed widely. Also, the downward adjustment of the forcing precipitation clearly resulted in a low snow bias in some regions. However, where the density of the observations was high, the CLASS snow model was deemed to have performed well. Sensitivity tests confirmed the satisfactory behavior of the current parameterizations of snow thermal conductivity, snow albedo refreshment threshold, and limiting snow depth and underlined the importance of snow interception by vegetation. Overall, the study demonstrated the necessity of using a wide variety of observation-based datasets for model validation.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.474
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations40
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HydrometeorologySame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207