MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2909856043 · doi:10.14288/1.0375764

An investigation of surface energy balance and turbulent heat flux on mountain glaciers

2018· article· en· W2909856043 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Noel Fitzpatrick

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnergy balanceGlacierHeat fluxTurbulenceFlux (metallurgy)GeologyEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyAtmospheric sciencesHeat transferMechanicsGeographyPhysicsGeomorphologyMaterials scienceThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The exchange of energy between a glacier surface and its surroundings, known as its surface energy balance (SEB), is a primary control on surface ablation rates. In the modelling of glacier SEB, parameterisation rather than direct measurement is frequently used to estimate one or more of the contributing heat fluxes, with smaller fluxes often deemed negligible. The turbulent fluxes of sensible and latent heat are commonly parameterised using forms of the bulk aerodynamic method. These techniques were developed for flat, uniform surfaces, and substantial uncertainty remains in the validity of their application over sloped, inhomogeneous glacier terrain. A multi-year field campaign was performed on two glaciers in the Purcell Mountains of British Columbia, Canada, where season-long observations of the complete SEB were obtained at multiple locations. The obtained dataset was used to drive an ablation model which showed good agreement with observed rates at seasonal, daily, and sub-daily timescales, effectively closing the energy balance. Through eddy covariance measurements, the turbulent heat fluxes were observed to be important components of SEB at each location, providing 31% of seasonal melt energy, and up to 78% of melt energy on individual days, underlining the need for their accurate estimation. The rain heat flux, often assumed negligible, was a significant contributor to melt energy on daily and sub-daily timescales during heavy rainfall (up to 20% day⁻¹). An evaluation of common turbulent flux parameterisation methods found their performance to be highly sensitive to the choice of roughness length scheme and atmospheric stability function. Observed roughness length values differed from those commonly assumed for glacier surfaces, and varied substantially between locations, highlighting the need for site-specific values. Two techniques were developed for the remote estimation of roughness using digital elevation models, and performed well when compared with in situ observations. The occurrence of shallow, katabatic surface layers with low-level wind maximums was frequently observed over the sloped, glacial test sites. Existing stability parameters and functions used in turbulent flux parameterisation were found to be unreliable in these conditions, as was the commonly employed assumption of constant turbulent flux and friction velocity with height through this layer.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.173

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.166
Teacher spread0.157 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Same topicCryospheric studies and observations→French-language works237,207→