MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790322129 · doi:10.3390/rs10020316

Assimilation of MODIS Snow Cover Fraction Observations into the NASA Catchment Land Surface Model

2018· article· en· W2790322129 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ally M. Toure, Rolf H. Reichle, Barton A. Forman, Augusto Getirana, Gabriëlle De Lannoy

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
FundersGoddard Space Flight CenterNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsSnowEnvironmental scienceData assimilationModerate-resolution imaging spectroradiometerSnow coverLand coverCorrelation coefficientClimatologyMeteorologyRemote sensingAtmospheric sciencesSatelliteGeologyLand useMathematicsGeographyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The NASA Catchment land surface model (CLSM) is the land model component used for the Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA). Here, the CLSM versions of MERRA and MERRA-Land are evaluated using snow cover fraction (SCF) observations from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS). Moreover, a computationally-efficient empirical scheme is designed to improve CLSM estimates of SCF, snow depth, and snow water equivalent (SWE) through the assimilation of MODIS SCF observations. Results show that data assimilation (DA) improved SCF estimates compared to the open-loop model without assimilation (OL), especially in areas with ephemeral snow cover and mountainous regions. A comparison of the SCF estimates from DA against snow cover estimates from the NOAA Interactive Multisensor Snow and Ice Mapping System showed an improvement in the probability of detection of up to 28% and a reduction in false alarms by up to 6% (relative to OL). A comparison of the model snow depth estimates against Canadian Meteorological Centre analyses showed that DA successfully improved the model seasonal bias from -0.017 m for OL to -0.007 m for DA, although there was no significant change in root-mean-square differences (RMSD) (0.095 m for OL, 0.093 m for DA). The time-average of the spatial correlation coefficient also improved from 0.61 for OL to 0.63 for DA. A comparison against in situ SWE measurements also showed improvements from assimilation. The correlation increased from 0.44 for OL to 0.49 for DA, the bias improved from -0.111 m for OL to -0.100 m for DA, and the RMSD decreased from 0.186 m for OL to 0.180 m for DA.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.134
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations58
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207