MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944739670 · doi:10.1029/2018wr023789

Effect of Digital Elevation Model Resolution on the Simulation of the Snow Cover Evolution in the High Atlas

2019· article· en· W2944739670 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohamed Wassim Baba, Simon Gascoin, Christophe Kinnard, Ahmed Marchane, Lahoucine Hanich

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Resources Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
FundersRégion Occitanie Pyrénées-MéditerranéeCentre National d’Etudes SpatialesCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAgence Universitaire de la Francophonie
KeywordsDigital elevation modelSnowElevation (ballistics)VariogramEnvironmental scienceSnowmeltAtlas (anatomy)Remote sensingSnow coverFlood mythGeologyMeteorologyGeomorphologyKrigingMathematicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The snow melt from the High Atlas represents a crucial water resource for crop irrigation in the semiarid regions of Morocco. Recent studies have used assimilation of snow cover area data from high‐resolution optical sensors to compute the snow water equivalent and snow melt in other mountain regions. These techniques however require large model ensembles, and therefore it is a challenge to determine the adequate model resolution that yields accurate results with reasonable computation time. Here we study the sensitivity of an energy balance model to the resolution of the model grid for a pilot catchment in the High Atlas. We used a time series of 8‐m resolution snow cover area maps with an average revisit time of 7.5 days to evaluate the model results. The digital elevation model was generated from Pléiades stereo images and resampled from 8 to 30, 90, 250, 500, and 1,000 m. The results indicate that the model performs well from 8 to 250 m but the agreement with observations drops at 500 m. This is because significant features of the topography were too smoothed out to properly characterize the spatial variability of meteorological forcing, including solar radiation. We conclude that a resolution of 250 m might be sufficient in this area. This result is consistent with the shape of the semivariogram of the topographic slope, suggesting that this semivariogram analysis could be used to transpose our conclusion to other study regions.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.221
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.240 · 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.

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

Citations67
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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