MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4224443964 · doi:10.5194/essd-2021-239-ac1

Reply on RC1

2022· peer-review· en· W4224443964 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Juha Lemmetyinen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepeer-review
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Forest ServiceWSL-Institut für Schnee- und Lawinenforschung SLFBoise State UniversityEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversität InnsbruckU.S. Department of AgricultureNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsTundraSnowGlacierPangaeaRemote sensingPhysical geographyGeographyElevation (ballistics)TaigaSynthetic aperture radarGeologyMeteorologyForestryArcticGeomorphologyStructural basinOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The European Space Agency SnowSAR instrument is a side looking, dual polarized (VV/VH), X/Ku band synthetic aperture radar (SAR), operable from a small aircraft. Between 2010 and 2013, the instrument was deployed at several sites in Northern Finland, Austrian Alps, and northern Canada. The purpose of the airborne campaigns was to measure the backscattering properties of snow-covered terrain to support the development of snow water equivalent retrieval techniques using SAR. SnowSAR was deployed in Sodankylä, Northern Finland for a single flight mission in March 2011 and twelve missions at two sites (tundra and boreal forest) in the winter of 2011–2012. Over the Austrian Alps, three flight missions were performed between November 2012 and February 2013 over three sites located in different elevation zones, representing a montane valley, Alpine tundra, and a glacier environment. In Canada, a total of two missions were flown in March and April 2013, over sites in the Trail Valley Creek watershed, Northwest Territories, representative of the tundra snow regime. This paper introduces the airborne SAR data, as well as coincident in situ information on land cover, vegetation and snow properties. To facilitate easy access to the data record the datasets described here are deposited in a permanent data repository (https://doi.pangaea.de/10.1594/PANGAEA.933255; Lemmetyinen et al., 2021). A temporary link to access the data without login information is provided for reviewers of this manuscript: https://www.pangaea.de/tok/e8c562c3c8a15ac34daa83d00c76fcb347330884.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.508

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0210.020
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1520.113

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCryospheric studies and observations→French-language works237,207→