Rain-on-snow events over North America based on two Canadian regional climate models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study evaluates projected changes to rain-on-snow (ROS) characteristics (i.e., frequency, rainfall amount, and runoff) for the future 2041–2070 period with respect to the current 1976–2005 period over North America using six simulations, based on two Canadian RCMs, driven by two driving GCMs for RCP4.5 and 8.5 emission pathways. Prior to assessing projected changes, the two RCMs are evaluated by comparing ERA-Interim driven RCM simulations with available observations, and results indicate that both models reproduce reasonably well the observed spatial patterns of ROS event frequency and other related features. Analysis of current and future simulations suggest general increases in ROS characteristics during the November–March period for most regions of Canada and for northwestern US for the future period, due to an increase in the rainfall frequency with warmer air temperatures in future. Future ROS runoff is often projected to increase more than future ROS rainfall amounts, particularly for northeastern North America, during snowmelt months, as ROS events usually accelerate snowmelt. The simulations show that ROS event is a primary flood generating mechanism over most of Canada and north-western and -central US for the January–May period for the current period and this is projected to continue in the future period. More focused analysis over selected basins shows decreases in future spring runoff due to decreases in both snow cover and ROS runoff. The above results highlight the need to take into consideration ROS events in water resources management adaptation strategies for future climate.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".