MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809885288 · doi:10.1029/2018wr023123

New Observed Data Sets for the Validation of Hydrology and Land Surface Models in Cold Climates

2018· article· en· W2809885288 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alan F. Hamlet

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Resources Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowmeltEnvironmental scienceSnowElevation (ballistics)MeteorologyClimatologyClimate modelPrecipitationContinuous simulationHydrology (agriculture)Climate changeComputer scienceGeologyGeographySimulationMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In a recent WRR paper, Yan et al. (2018, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017WR021290 ) have derived a simple, elegant, and useful way of reanalyzing quality‐controlled SNOTEL data sets to produce quantitative estimates of water reaching the land surface during rain, snowmelt, and rain‐on‐snow events, and use these data to generate “next‐generation” intensity duration, and frequency curves for these quantities at SNOTEL measurement locations. These new data sets may prove useful as direct inputs to design processes in some cases, but I argue in this commentary that they will probably have much more important application to the validation and refinement of off‐line hydrology models and land surface schemes embedded in climate models, which can then be used to extend these data in space and time to create more comprehensive products to guide infrastructure design. If well validated, such tools can be used to extend backward in time to make detailed hindcasts of the historical record with more complete spatial and temporal coverage (which also facilitates more accurate estimation of extremes with longer return intervals) and forward in time to project future conditions that are needed to design long‐lived infrastructure in what will likely be a highly nonstationary environment. In addition, there is a need to extend these data sets to include lower elevation areas in mountain environments, and other areas of the United States and Canada with cold winter climates.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.168

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.175
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations15
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Resources ResearchSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207