Bibliographic record
Abstract
Snowmelt runoff serves both human needs and ecosystem services and is an important parameter in operational forecasting systems. Sentinel-1 Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) observations can estimate the timing of melt within a snowpack; however, these estimates have not been applied on large spatial scales. We present here a workflow to fuse Sentinel-1 SAR and optical data from Landsat-8 and Sentinel-2 to estimate the onset and duration of snowmelt in the Lajoie Basin, a large watershed in the Southern Coast Mountains of British Columbia. A backscatter threshold is used to infer the point at which snowpack saturation occurs, and the snowpack begins to produce runoff. Multispectral imagery is used to estimate snow free dates across the basin to define the end of the snowmelt period. SAR estimates of snowmelt onset form consistent trends by elevation and aspect on the watershed scale and reflect snowmelt records from continuous SWE observations. SAR estimates of snowpack saturation are most effective on moderate to low slopes (< 30°) in open areas. The accuracy of snowmelt durations is reduced due to persistent cloud cover in optical imagery. Despite these challenges, snowmelt durations agree with trends in snow depths observed in the Lajoie. This approach has high potential for adaptability to other alpine regions and can provide estimates of snowmelt timing in ungauged basins.
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 | 0.002 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.015 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.130 | 0.110 |
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".