Evaluation of LiDAR-Derived Snow Depth Estimates From the iPhone 12 Pro
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Snow is a critical contributor to the global water-energy budget with impacts on springtime flooding and water resource management practices. Laser altimetry [light detection and ranging (LiDAR)] is a remote-sensing technique that has demonstrated skill in monitoring snow depth, but the expense of purchasing and transporting traditional LiDAR equipment limits their operational use. In this work, we demonstrate that the LiDAR sensor installed on the Apple iPhone 12 Pro consumer smartphone is a real-time, handheld measurement instrument for accurately observing changes in snow depth. Two independent field experiments in Southern Ontario, Canada, found that the iPhone LiDAR was able to accurately capture daily changes in snow depth when compared toin situsnow ruler measurements.In situand LiDAR comparisons of xs$n=75$days at measurement site A exhibit a correlation of$r > 0.99$, mean absolute bias less than 1 mm, and a root mean squared error (RMSE) of approximately 6 mm. A similar positive agreement was also noted at the second field study site for$n=16$measurements over the same period. The high accuracy of the LiDAR sensor suggests that a mobile application could be developed which allows users to quickly scan a snow-covered area before and after a snowfall event and consequently use this data to aid in filling current observational gaps through a citizen-science-based approach to measuring changes in snow depth.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".