MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2897384615 · doi:10.5194/essd-11-89-2019

A long-term hydrometeorological dataset (1993–2014) of a northern mountain basin: Wolf Creek Research Basin, Yukon Territory, Canada

2019· article· en· W2897384615 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kabir Rasouli, John W. Pomeroy, J. R. Janowicz, Tyler J. Williams, Sean K. Carey

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth system science data · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityYukon Department of EnvironmentUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGlobal Water FuturesNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationNatural Environment Research CouncilCanadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
KeywordsHydrometeorologyTundraSnowBiomeSubarctic climateStructural basinStreamflowSnowmeltClimate changePrecipitationForcing (mathematics)Hydrology (agriculture)ClimatologyEnvironmental scienceGlacierDrainage basinPhysical geographyGeologyArcticEcosystemMeteorologyGeographyGeomorphologyOceanographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. A set of hydrometeorological data is presented in this paper, which can be used to characterize the hydrometeorology and climate of a subarctic mountain basin and has proven particularly useful for forcing hydrological models and assessing their performance in capturing hydrological processes in subarctic alpine environments. The forcing dataset includes daily precipitation, hourly air temperature, humidity, wind, solar and net radiation, soil temperature, and geographical information system data. The model performance assessment data include snow depth and snow water equivalent, streamflow, soil moisture, and water level in a groundwater well. This dataset was recorded at different elevation bands in Wolf Creek Research Basin, near Whitehorse, Yukon Territory, Canada, representing forest, shrub tundra, and alpine tundra biomes from 1993 through 2014. Measurements continue through 2018 and are planned for the future at this basin and will be updated to the data website. The database presented and described in this article is available for download at https://doi.org/10.20383/101.0113.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.223 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations28
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarth system science dataSame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207