MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308580118 · doi:10.3390/w14213575

A Hydrograph-Based Approach to Improve Satellite-Derived Snow Water Equivalent at the Watershed Scale

2022· article· en· W4308580118 on OpenAlexaffabout
Charles Whittaker, Robert Leconte

Bibliographic record

VenueWater · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydrographEnvironmental scienceSnowWatershedSurface runoffRemote sensingSnowpackMeteorologySnowmeltScale (ratio)HydrometeorologyHydrology (agriculture)PrecipitationComputer scienceGeographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For the past few decades, remote sensing has been a valuable tool for deriving global information on snow water equivalent (SWE), where products derived from space-borne passive microwave radiometers are favoured as they respond to snow depth, an important component of SWE. GlobSnow, a novel SWE product, has increased the accuracy of global-scale SWE estimates by combining remotely sensed radiometric data with other physiographic characteristics, such as snow depth, as quantified by climatic stations. However, research has demonstrated that passive microwaves algorithms tend to underestimate SWE for deep snowpack. Approaches were proposed to correct for such underestimation; however, they are computer intensive and complex to implement at the watershed scale. In this study, SWEmax information from the near real time 5-km GlobSnow product, provided by Copernicus and the European Space Agency (ESA) and GlobSnow product at 25 km resolution were corrected using a simple bias correction approach for watershed scale applications. This method, referred to as the Watershed Scale Correction (WSC) approach, estimates the bias based on the direct runoff that occurs during the spring melt season. Direct runoff is estimated on the one hand from SWEmax information as main input. Infiltration is also considered in computing direct runoff. An independent estimation of direct runoff from gauged stations is also performed. Discrepancy between these estimates allows for estimating the bias correction factor. This approach is advantageous as it exploits data that commonly exists i.e., flow at gauged stations and remotely sensed/reanalysis data such as snow cover and precipitation. The WSC approach was applied to watersheds located in Eastern Canada. It was found that the average bias moved from 33.5% with existing GlobSnow product to 18% with the corrected product, using the recommended recursive filter coefficient β of 0.925 for baseflow separation. Results show the usefulness of integrating direct runoff for bias correction of existing GlobSnow product at the watershed scale. In addition, potential benefits are offered using the recursive filter approach for baseflow separation of watersheds with limited in situ SWE measurements, to further reduce overall uncertainties and bias. The WSC approach should be appealing for poorly monitored watersheds where SWE measurements are critical for hydropower production and where snowmelt can pose serious flood-related damages.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWaterSame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207