MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2810417508 · doi:10.1002/2017wr020731

Modeling blowing snow accumulation downwind of an obstruction: The <scp>O</scp>hara <scp>E</scp>ulerian particle distribution equation

2017· article· en· W2810417508 on OpenAlexaff
Nicholas Kinar

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Resources Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsGlobal Institute for Water SecurityUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowEnvironmental scienceWind speedMeteorologyAtmospheric sciencesGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An equation was proposed to model the height of blowing snow accumulation downwind of an obstacle such as vegetation, a snow fence, a building, or a topographic feature. The equation does not require aerodynamic flow condition parameters such as wind speed, allowing for the spatial distribution of snow to be determined at locations where meteorological data is not available. However, snow particle diffusion, drift, and erosion coefficients must be estimated for application of the equation. These coefficients can be used to provide insight into the relative magnitude of blowing snow processes at a field location. Further research is required to determine efficient methods for coefficient estimation. The equation could be used with other models of wind‐transported snow to predict snow accumulation downwind of an obstacle without the need for wind speed adjustments or correction equations. Applications for this equation include the design of snow fences, and the use of this equation with other hydrological models to predict snow distribution, climate change, drought, flooding, and avalanches.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.173

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.157
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.177 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Resources ResearchSame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207