MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3201263053 · doi:10.1175/bams-d-20-0228.1

How Well Are We Measuring Snow Post-SPICE?

2021· article· en· W3201263053 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of the American Meteorological Society · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPrecipitation Measurement and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
KeywordsSpicePrecipitationSnowEnvironmental scienceMeteorologySurface runoffStreamflowClimatologyQuantitative precipitation forecastComputer scienceEngineeringGeologyGeographyDrainage basin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Accurate snowfall measurements are necessary for meteorology, hydrology, and climate research. Typical uses include creating and calibrating gridded precipitation products, the verification of model simulations, driving hydrologic models, input into aircraft deicing processes, and estimating streamflow runoff in the spring. These applications are significantly impacted by errors in solid precipitation measurements. The recent WMO Solid Precipitation Intercomparison Experiment (SPICE) attempted to characterize and reduce some of the measurement uncertainties through an international effort involving 15 countries utilizing over 20 types and models of precipitation gauges from various manufacturers. Key results from WMO-SPICE are presented herein. Recent work and future research opportunities that build on the results of WMO-SPICE are also highlighted.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
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)0.0040.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.180 · 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