MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2774348486 · doi:10.1175/jhm-d-17-0179.1

Scale Interactions in Turbulence for Mountain Blowing Snow

2017· article· en· W2774348486 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Nikolas Aksamit, John W. Pomeroy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hydrometeorology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsCanada Foundation for InnovationAlberta Agriculture and ForestryGlobal Institute for Water Security, University of Saskatchewan
KeywordsSnowTurbulenceEddyEnvironmental scienceTerrainAtmospheric sciencesMeteorologyAnemometerGeologyPhysicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Blowing snow particle transport responds to wind motions across many length and time scales. This coupling is nonlinear by nature and complicated in atmospheric flows where eddies of many sizes are superimposed. In mountainous terrain, wind flow descriptions are further complicated by topographically influenced or enhanced flows. To improve the current understanding and modeling of blowing snow transport in complex terrain, statistically significant timing and frequencies of wind–snow coupling were identified in high-frequency observations of surface blowing snow and near-surface turbulence from a mountain field site in the Canadian Rockies. Investigation of the mechanisms influencing near-surface, high-frequency turbulence and snow concentration fluctuations provided strong evidence for amplitude modulation from large-scale motions. The large-scale atmospheric motions modulating near-surface turbulence and snow transport were then compared to specific quadrant analysis structures recently identified as relevant for outdoor blowing snow transport. The results suggest that large atmospheric structures modulate the amplitude of high-frequency turbulence and modify turbulence statistics typically used to model blowing snow. Additionally, blowing snow was preferentially redistributed under the footprint of these same sweep motions, with both low- and high-frequency coherence increasing in their presence.

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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.504

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations35
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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