ACCURACY OF SNOW DEPTH ESTIMATION IN MOUNTAIN AND PRAIRIE ENVIRONMENTS BY AN UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. The quantification of the spatial distribution of snow is crucial to predict and assess snow as a water resource and understand land-atmosphere interactions in cold regions. Typical remote sensing approaches to quantify snow depth have focused on terrestrial and airborne laser scanning and recently airborne (manned and unmanned) photogrammetry. In this study photography from a small unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) was used to generate digital surface models (DSMs) and orthomosaics for snowcovers at a cultivated agricultural Canadian Prairie and a sparsely-vegetated Rocky Mountain alpine ridgetop site using Structure from Motion (SfM). The ability of this method to quantify snow depth, changes in depth and its spatial variability was assessed for different terrain types over time. Root mean square errors in snow depth estimation from the DSMs were 8.8 cm for a short prairie grain stubble surface, 13.7 cm for a tall prairie grain stubble surface and 8.5 cm for an alpine mountain surface. This technique provided meaningful information on maximum snow accumulation and snow-covered area depletion at all sites, while temporal changes in snow depth could also be quantified at the alpine site due to the deeper snowpack and consequent higher signal-to noise-ratio. The application of SfM to UAV photographs can estimate snow depth in areas with snow depth > 30 cm – this restricts its utility for studies of the ablation of shallow, windblown snowpacks. Accuracy varied with surface characteristics, sunlight and wind speed during the flight, with the most consistent performance found for wind speeds < 6 m s−1, clear skies, high sun angles and surfaces with negligible vegetation cover. Relative to surfaces having greater contrast and more identifiable features, snow surfaces present unique challenges when applying SfM to imagery collected by a small UAV for the generation of DSMs. Regardless, the low cost, deployment mobility and the capability of repeat-on-demand flights that generate DSMs and orthomosaics of unprecedented spatial resolution provide exciting opportunities to quantify previously unobservable small-scale variability in snow depth and its dynamics.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".