Testing remote sensing estimates of snow water equivalent in the framework of the European Drought Observatory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We evaluated the feasibility for operational snow drought monitoring over Europe based on the near-real-time snow water equivalent (SWE) satellite product from the EUMETSAT Satellite Application Facility on Support to Operational Hydrology and Water Management (H-SAF). To do so, the consistency of this dataset with the consolidated dataset of the Canadian Meteorological Centre (CMC), as well as with the ERA5 reanalysis dataset from the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, was tested in terms of both spatial snow coverage and detection of anomalies from the long-term climatology. The analysis confirms a general good agreement among the three products as well as substantial differences over mountainous terrains, with the H-SAF product capturing only about 30% of the areas identified by CMC as snow-covered in those areas, while a better match between the ERA5 and the CMC spatial coverage is observed. However, significant inconsistencies in the correlation between all three SWE anomalies are observed over mountain areas. Due to the lack of a reliable reference dataset, the observed inconsistencies and the coarse spatial resolution (0.25 deg) of all three products limit the possibility for snow drought monitoring over key European regions such as the Alps.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".