MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Simulation of snow cover formation and melt with publication of the output data on the web map service (on the example of Kama river basin)

2019· article· en· W2971403616 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sergey Pyankov, N. A. Kalinin, Andrey Shikhov, R.K. Abdullin, A. V. Bykov

Bibliographic record

VenueIOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowMeltwaterPrecipitationIconOutflowMeteorologySnow coverNumerical weather predictionEnvironmental scienceWater equivalentClimatologyNational weather serviceStructural basinData assimilationHydrology (agriculture)Computer scienceGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract It is performed an assessment of the use of daily precipitation forecasts of global numerical weather prediction (NWP) models GFS (U.S.), GEM (Canada), SLAV (Russia) and ICON (Germany) as input data for snow accumulation and melt modelling in the Kama river basin for two cold seasons. It is shown, that maximum snow water equivalent (SWE) calculated on the basis of NWP models output has an error less than 27% of the measured values, in the conditions of 2017-2018 snow accumulation season. However, this is preliminary assessment, which requires verification by several seasons. It is rather difficult to conclude which model provides highest accuracy of SWE calculation, because each of them has its specific limitations. In 2018-2019 cold season, we additionally obtained ICON model data, which provides the most accurate forecast of precipitation. The simulated SWE and meltwater outflow data are published on the online web map service.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.419

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.194
Teacher spread0.159 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental ScienceSame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207