MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4384856151 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-2023-1603

Extending the utility of space-borne snow water equivalent observations over vegetated areas with data assimilation

2023· preprint· en· W4384856151 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Justin M. Pflug, Melissa L. Wrzesien, Sujay V. Kumar, Eunsang Cho, Kristi R. Arsenault, Paul R. Houser, Carrie Vuyovich

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsSnowpackSnowEnvironmental scienceData assimilationRemote sensingTree canopyGridMeteorologyCanopyGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Snow is a vital component of the Earth system. Yet, no snow-focused satellite remote sensing platform currently exists. In this study, we investigate how synthetic observations of snow water equivalent (SWE) representative of a synthetic aperture radar remote sensing platform could improve spatiotemporal estimates of snowpack. We use an Observation System Simulation Experiment, specifically investigating how much snow simulated using popular models and forcing data could be improved by assimilating synthetic observations of SWE. We focus this study across a 24°-by-37° domain in the Western United States and Canada, simulating snow at 250 m resolution and hourly timesteps in water-year 2019. We perform two data assimilation experiments, including: 1) a simulation excluding synthetic observations in forests where canopies obstruct remote sensing retrievals, and 2) a simulation inferring snow distribution in forested grid cells using synthetic observations from nearby canopy-free grid cells. Results found that assimilating synthetic SWE observations improved average SWE biases at peak snowpack timing in shrub, grass, crop, bare-ground, and wetland land cover types from 14 %, to within 1 %. However, forested grid cells contained a disproportionate amount of SWE volume. In forests, SWE mean absolute errors at peak snowpack were 111 mm, and average SWE biases were on the order of 150 %. Here, the data assimilation approach that estimated forest SWE using observations from the nearest canopy-free grid cells substantially improved these SWE biases (18 %) and the SWE mean absolute error (27 mm). Simulations employing data assimilation also improved estimates of the temporal evolution of both SWE and runoff, even in spring snowmelt periods when melting snow and high snow liquid water content prevented synthetic SWE retrievals. In fact, in the Upper Colorado River basin, melt-season SWE biases were improved from 63 % to within 1 %, and the Nash Sutcliffe Efficiency of runoff improved from –2.59 to 0.22. These results demonstrate the value of data assimilation and a snow-focused globally relevant remote sensing platform for improving the characterization of SWE and associated water availability.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.198

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.191
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.103 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCryospheric studies and observations→French-language works237,207→