MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

MODIS snow persistence for Canada and Alaska 2001-2019

2020· dataset· en· W4233183047 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John C. Hammond

Bibliographic record

VenueHydroShare Resources · 2020
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPersistence (discontinuity)SnowPhysical geographyEnvironmental scienceGeographyMeteorologyClimatologyGeologyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Snow persistence (SP) or the snow cover index (SCI), is the fraction of time that snow is present on the ground for a defined period. SP was calculated on a pixel by pixel basis using MODIS/Terra Snow Cover 8-Day L3 Global 500m Grid, Collection 6 obtained from the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC). We computed the 1 January – 3 July SP for each year as the fraction of 8-day MODIS images with snow present. For more information on MODIS snow persistence please see: -Hammond, J. C., Saavedra, F. A., & Kampf, S. K. (2018). Global snow zone maps and trends in snow persistence 2001–2016. International Journal of Climatology, 38(12), 4369-4383. -Hammond, J. C., Saavedra, F. A., & Kampf, S. K. (2018). How does snow persistence relate to annual streamflow in mountain watersheds of the Western US with wet maritime and dry continental climates?. Water Resources Research, 54(4), 2605-2623. -Hammond, J. C., F. A. Saavedra, S. K. Kampf (2017). MODIS MOD10A2 derived snow persistence and no data index for the western U.S., HydroShare, https://doi.org/10.4211/hs.1c62269aa802467688d25540caf2467e

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.005

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.175 · 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
GenreDataset

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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueHydroShare ResourcesSame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207