MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4365516827 · doi:10.3390/rs15082065

Snow Density Retrieval in Quebec Using Space-Borne SMOS Observations

2023· article· en· W4365516827 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xiaowen Gao, Jinmei Pan, Zhiqing Peng, Tianjie Zhao, Yu Bai, Jianwei Yang, Lingmei Jiang, Jiancheng Shi, Husi Letu

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSnowEnvironmental scienceRadiometerSnowpackRemote sensingMean squared errorAtmospheric radiative transfer codesData assimilationSatelliteBrightness temperatureMeteorologyAtmospheric sciencesRadiative transferGeologyBrightnessMathematicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Snow density varies spatially, temporally, and vertically within the snowpack and is the key to converting snow depth to snow water equivalent. While previous studies have demonstrated the feasibility of retrieving snow density using a multiple-angle L-band radiometer in theory and in ground-based radiometer experiments, this technique has not yet been applied to satellites. In this study, the snow density was retrieved using the Soil Moisture Ocean Salinity (SMOS) satellite radiometer observations at 43 stations in Quebec, Canada. We used a one-layer snow radiative transfer model and added a τ-ω vegetation model over the snow to consider the forest influence. We developed an objective method to estimate the forest parameters (τ, ω) and soil roughness (SD) from SMOS measurements during the snow-free period and applied them to estimate snow density. Prior knowledge of soil permittivity was used in the entire process, which was calculated from the Global Land Data Assimilation System (GLDAS) soil simulations using a frozen soil dielectric model. Results showed that the retrieved snow density had an overall root-mean-squared error (RMSE) of 83 kg/m3 for all stations, with a mean bias of 9.4 kg/m3. The RMSE can be further reduced if an artificial tuning of three predetermined parameters (τ, ω, and SD) is allowed to reduce systematic biases at some stations. The remote sensing retrieved snow density outperforms the reanalysis snow density from GLDAS in terms of bias and temporal variation characteristics.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207