MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4233037998 · doi:10.5194/tc-2016-57

An assessment of two automated snow water equivalent instruments during the WMO Solid Precipitation Intercomparison Experiment

2016· preprint· en· W4233037998 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Craig D. Smith, Anna Kontu, Richard Laffin, John W. Pomeroy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowpackWater equivalentSnowEnvironmental sciencePrecipitationAtmospheric sciencesMeteorologyClimatologyRemote sensingHydrology (agriculture)GeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. During the WMO Solid Precipitation Intercomparison Experiment (SPICE), automated measurements of snow water equivalent (SWE) were made at the Sodankylä (Finland) and Caribou Creek (Canada) SPICE sites during the northern hemisphere winters of 2013/2014 and 2014/2015. Supplementary intercomparison measurements were made at Fortress Mountain (Kananaskis, Canada) during the 2013/2014 winter. The objectives of this analysis are to assess automated SWE measurements against a reference, comment on their performance, and make recommendations on how to best use the instrument and interpret its measurements. Sodankylä, Caribou Creek and Fortress Mountain hosted a Campbell Scientific CS725 passive gamma radiation SWE sensor. Sodankylä also hosted a Sommer Messtechnik SSG1000 snow scale. The CS725 measurement principle is based on measuring the attenuation of soil emitted gamma radiation by the snowpack and relating the attenuation to SWE. The SSG1000 measures the mass of the overlying snowpack directly by using a weighing platform and load cell. Manual SWE measurements were obtained at the SPICE sites on a bi-weekly basis over the accumulation/melt periods using bulk density samplers. These manual measurements are considered to be the reference for the intercomparison. Results from Sodankylӓ and Caribou Creek showed that the CS725 generally overestimates SWE as compared to manual measurements by roughly 30 to 35 % with correlations (r2) as high as 0.99 for Sodankylӓ and 0.90 for Caribou Creek. The RMSE varies from 30 to 43 mm water equivalent (w.e.) and 18 to 25 mm w.e. at Sodankylӓ and Caribou Creek respectively. The correlation at Fortress Mountain was 0.94 (RMSE of 48 mm w.e.) with no systematic overestimation. The SSG1000 snow scale, having a different measurement principle, agreed quite closely with the manual measurements at Sodankylӓ throughout the intercomparison periods (r2 as high as 0.99 and RMSE from 8 to 24 mm w.e.). When the SSG1000 is compared to the CS725, the agreement is linear until the start of seasonal melt when the positive bias in the CS725 increases substantially relative to the SSG1000. Since both Caribou Creek and Sodankylӓ have sandy soil, water from the snowpack readily infiltrates into the soil during melt but the CS725 does not differentiate this water from the un-melted snow. This issue can be identified, at least during the spring melt, with soil moisture and temperature observations like those measured at Caribou Creek. With a less permeable soil and surface runoff, the increase in the instrument bias during melt is not as significant, as shown by the Fortress Mountain intercomparison.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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