MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972056350 · doi:10.1594/pangaea.897575

ESM-SnowMIP meteorological and evaluation datasets at ten reference sites (in situ and bias corrected reanalysis data)

2019· dataset· en· W2972056350 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cécile B. Ménard, Richard Essery

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2019
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilRussian Science FoundationRussian Foundation for Basic Research
KeywordsIn situEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyClimatologyStatisticsRemote sensingGeographyMathematicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In situ meteorological forcing and evaluation data, and bias-corrected reanalysis forcing data for cold regions modelling at ten sites: one maritime (Sapporo, Japan), one arctic (Sodankylä, Finland), three boreal (Old Aspen, Old Jack Pine and Old Black Spruce, Saskatchewan, Canada) and five mid-latitude alpine (Col de Porte, France; Reynolds Mountain East, Idaho, USA, Senator Beck and Swamp Angel, Colorado, USA; Weissfluhjoch, Switzerland). The long-term datasets are the reference sites chosen for evaluating models participating in the Earth System Model-Snow Model Intercomparison Project (ESM-SnowMIP). Periods covered by the in situ data vary between seven and twenty years of hourly meteorological data, with evaluation data (snow depth, snow water equivalent, albedo, soil temperature and surface temperature) available at varying temporal intervals. 30-year (1980-2010) time-series have been extracted from a global gridded surface meteorology dataset (Global Soil Wetness Project Phase 3) for the grid cells containing the reference sites, interpolated to one-hour timesteps and bias corrected.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.010

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 head0.352
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.006 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations19
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicClimate change and permafrostFrench-language works237,207