MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3016505560 · doi:10.3390/s20082292

In-Situ LED-Based Observation of Snow Surface and Depth Transects

2020· article· en· W3016505560 on OpenAlexafffund
Celeste Barnes, Chris Hopkinson, Thomas C. Porter, Zhouxin Xi

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta InnovatesGovernment of AlbertaUniversity of Lethbridge
KeywordsSnowpackSnowTransectRemote sensingEnvironmental scienceSIGNAL (programming language)LidarAlbedo (alchemy)Measured depthGeologySnowmeltRepeatabilityMeteorologyGeographyGeomorphologyChemistryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As part of a new snowpack monitoring framework, this study evaluated the feasibility of using an LED LIDAR (Leddar) time of flight sensor for snowpack depth measurement. The Leddar sensor has two additional features over simple sonic ranging sensors: (i) the return signal is divided into 16 segments across a 48° field of view, each recording individual distance-to-target (DTT) measurements; (ii) an index of reflectance or intensity signal is recorded for each segment. These two features provide information describing snowpack morphology and surface condition. The accuracy of Leddar sensor DTT measurements for snow depth monitoring was found to be < 20 mm, which was better than the 50 mm quoted by the manufacturer, and the precision was < 5 mm. Leddar and independent sonic ranger snow depth measurement showed strong linear agreement (r2 = 0.98). There was also a strong linear relationship (r2 = 0.98) between Leddar and manual field snow depth measurements. The intensity signal response was found to correlate with snow surface albedo and inversely with air temperature (r = 0.77 and −0.77, respectively).

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensors→Same topicCryospheric studies and observations→French-language works237,207→