Avalanche Safety Practices Among Backcountry Skiers and Snowboarders in Jackson Hole in 2016
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Carrying standard safety gear (beacon, probe, and shovel), planning a route of descent, and recreating with companions can help to mitigate the risk of injury or death resulting from avalanches in the backcountry. The goal of this study was to identify factors associated with performance of these safety practices. METHODS: A convenience sample of backcountry skiers and snowboarders was surveyed in 2016 at the backcountry gates of Jackson Hole Mountain Resort. Each participant was surveyed on characteristics including skill level, sex, age, prior avalanche education, and residency in the Jackson Hole area. Safety practices were also measured against avalanche hazard forecasts. Correlations were assessed using Fisher's exact testing. RESULTS: A total of 334 participants were surveyed. Factors associated with carrying avalanche safety gear included higher expertise, being a resident of the Jackson Hole area, and prior avalanche education. Factors associated with having a planned route of descent included higher expertise and being a resident of the Jackson Hole area. Factors associated with recreating with companions included younger age and lower expertise. Sex had no association with any of the surveyed safety practices. Participants were less likely to carry avalanche safety gear on low avalanche hazard days. CONCLUSIONS: Certain individual characteristics of backcountry skiers and snowboarders are associated with increased frequency of adherence to recommended safety practices. These findings suggest that particular categories of backcountry recreationists may benefit from further avalanche safety education. The results of this study could help direct future educational efforts among backcountry recreationists.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".