North American rain-on-snow ablation climatology
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rain-on-snow ablation events carry a relatively high risk for rapid snowmelt and runoff due to the combination of liquid precipitation and generally high turbulent fluxes into the snowpack. Determining the variability in rain-on-snow ablation is critical in describing local hydroclimate. This study uses a gridded observational snow dataset to examine spatiotemporal variations in North American rain-on-snow ablation over a 50 yr period. Here we show rain-on-snow ablation represents approximately 33% of all ablation events in the eastern third of the continent, compared to <20% in its interior. Rain-on-snow ablation was most frequent along the western and eastern coasts of the continent, with >10 events observed per year on average. A central band of enhanced event frequencies propagated meridionally during the calendar year, most prominently in the eastern half of the continent. Seasonal (September to August) event frequency from 1960-2009 significantly decreased by approximately 50% across much of northern Quebec and in the southern Appalachians, while it significantly increased in portions of British Columbia and southeastern Quebec. Interannual variations in event frequency were primarily forced by variations in seasonal-scale snowfall and snow depth, and only moderately associated with variations in air temperatures.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 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) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 it