Evaluation of temporal consistency of snow depth drivers of a Rocky Mountain watershed in southern Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Collecting spatially representative data over large areas is a challenge within snow monitoring frameworks. Identifying consistent trends in snow accumulation properties enables increased sampling efficiency by minimizing field collection time and/or remote sensing costs. Seasonal snowpack depth estimations during mid‐winter and melt onset conditions were derived from airborne Lidar over the West Castle Watershed in the southern Canadian Rockies on three dates. Each dataset was divided into five sets of snow depth driver classes: elevation, aspect, topographic position index, canopy cover and slope. Datasets were quality controlled by eliminating snow depth values above the 99th percentile value, which had a negligible effect on average snow depths. Consistent trends were observed among driver classes with peak snow accumulation occurring within the treeline ecotone, north‐facing aspects, open canopies, topographic depressions and areas with low slope angle. Although mid‐winter class trends for each driver were similar and watershed‐scale snow depth distributions were significantly correlated (0.76, p < .01), depth distributions within the same driver class of the three datasets were not correlated due to recent snowfall events, redistribution and settling processes. Trends in driver classes during late season melt onset were similar to mid‐winter conditions but watershed scale distribution correlation results varied with seasonality (0.68 mid‐winter 2014 and melt onset 2016; 0.65 mid‐winter 2017 and melt onset 2016, p < .1). This is due to the differing stages of accumulation or ablation and the upward migration in the 0°C isotherm during spring, when snow depth can be declining in valley bottoms while still increasing at higher elevations. The observed consistency in depth driver controls can be used to guide future integrated snow monitoring frameworks.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".