Added value of solar radiation in snowmelt models: benchmarking empirical models in the High Atlas Range, Morocco
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Estimating snow water equivalent (SWE) and snowmelt in semi-arid mountain ranges is an important but challenging task, due to the large spatial variability of the seasonal snow cover and scarcity of field observations. Adding solar radiation as snowmelt predictor within empirical snow models is often done to account for topographically induced variations in melt rates, at the cost of increasing model complexity. This study examines the added value of including different treatments of solar radiation within empirical snowmelt equations. Three spatially-distributed, enhanced temperature index models that respectively include the potential clear-sky direct radiation (HTI), the incoming solar radiation (ETIA) and net solar radiation (ETIB) were compared with a classical temperature-index model (TI) to simulate SWE within the Rheraya basin in the Moroccan High Atlas Range. Extensive model validation of simulated snow cover area (SCA) was carried out using blended MODIS snow cover products over the 2003-2016 period. We found that models enhanced with a radiation term, particularly ETIB which includes net solar radiation, better explain the observed SCA variability compared to the TI model. However, differences in model performance were overall small, as were the differences in basin averaged simulated SWE and melt rates. SCA variability was found to be dominated by elevation, which is well captured by the TI model, while the ETIB model was found to best explain additional SCA variability. The small differences in model performance for predicting spatiotemporal SCA variations is interpreted to results from the averaging out of topographically-induced variations in melt rates simulated by the enhanced models, a situation favored by the rather uniform distribution of slope aspects in the basin. Moreover, the aggregation of simulated SCA from the 100 m model resolution towards the MODIS resolution (500 m) suppresses key spatial variability related to solar radiation, which attenuates the differences between the TI and the radiative models.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".