MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2800105609 · doi:10.1002/joc.5539

Adjustment of measurement errors to reconcile precipitation distribution in the high‐altitude Indus basin

2018· article· en· W2800105609 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Climatology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinisterie van Buitenlandse ZakenDepartment for International Development, UK GovernmentInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsPrecipitationEnvironmental scienceSnowClimatologyDrainage basinGlacierClimate changeAtmospheric sciencesPhysical geographyGeologyMeteorologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Precipitation in the high‐altitude Indus basin governs its renewable water resources affecting water, energy and food securities. However, reliable estimates of precipitation climatology and associated hydrological implications are seriously constrained by the quality of observed data. As such, quantitative and spatio‐temporal distributions of precipitation estimated by previous studies in the study area are highly contrasting and uncertain. Generally, scarcity and biased distribution of observed data at the higher altitudes and measurement errors in precipitation observations are the primary causes of such uncertainties. In this study, we integrated precipitation data of 307 observatories with the net snow accumulations estimated through mass balance studies at 21 major glacier zones. Precipitation observations are adjusted for measurement errors using the guidelines and standard methods developed under the WMO's international precipitation measurement intercomparisons, while net snow accumulations are adjusted for ablation losses using standard ablation gradients. The results showed more significant increases in precipitation of individual stations located at higher altitudes during winter months, which are consistent with previous studies. Spatial interpolation of unadjusted precipitation observations and net snow accumulations at monthly scale indicated significant improvements in the quantitative and spatio‐temporal distribution of precipitation over the unadjusted case and previous studies. Adjustment of river flows revealed only a marginal contribution of net glacier mass balance to river flows. The adjusted precipitation estimates are more consistent with the corresponding adjusted river flows. The study recognized that the higher river flows than the corresponding precipitation estimates by the previous studies are mainly due to underestimated precipitation. The results can be useful for water balance studies and bias correction of gridded precipitation products for the study area.

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.

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)0.000
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 score0.311

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.238 · 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