Quality Control Impacts on Total Precipitation Gauge Records for Montane Valley and Ridge Sites in SW Alberta, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents adjustment routines for Geonor totalizing precipitation gauge data collected from the headwaters of the Oldman River, within the southwestern Alberta Canadian Rockies. The gauges are situated at mountain valley and alpine ridge locations with varying degrees of canopy cover. These data are prone to sensor noise and environment-induced measurement errors requiring an ordered set of quality control (QC) corrections using nearby weather station data. Sensor noise at valley sites with single-vibrating wire gauges accounted for the removal of 5% to 8% (49–76 mm) of annual precipitation. This was compensated for by an increase of 6% to 8% (50–76 mm) from under-catch. A three-wire ridge gauge did not experience significant sensor noise; however, the under-catch of snow resulted in 42% to 52% (784–1342 mm) increased precipitation. When all QC corrections were applied, the annual cumulative precipitation at the ridge demonstrated increases of 39% to 49% (731–1269 mm), while the valley gauge adjustments were −4% to 1% (−39 mm to 13 mm). Public sector totalizing precipitation gauge records often undergo minimal QC. Care must be exercised to check the corrections applied to such records when used to estimate watershed water balance or precipitation orographic enhancement. Systematic errors at open high-elevation sites may exceed nearby valley or forest sites.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".