Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Regional-scale surface energy balance (SEB) models of glacier melt require forcing by coarse-gridded data from reanalysis and/or global climate models that need to be downscaled to glacier scale. As on-glacier meteorological observations are rare, it generally remains unknown how exact the reanalysis and downscaled data are for the local-scale SEB modeling. We address this question by evaluating the performance of reanalysis from the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ERA5 and ERA5-Land reanalysis), with and without downscaling, at four glaciers in Western Canada with available on- glacier meteorological measurements collected over different summer seasons. We dynamically downscale ERA5 with the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model at 3.3 km and 1.1 km grid spacing. We find that the SEB model, forced separately with the observations and the two reanalyses, yields <10 % difference in simulated total melt energy and shows strong correlations (>0.79) in simulated timeseries of daily melt energy at each site. The good performance of the reanalysis-derived melt energy is partly due to cancellation of biases between overestimated incoming shortwave radiation and substantially underestimated wind speed and subsequently turbulent heat fluxes. Downscaling with WRF improves the simulation of wind speed, while other meteorological variables show similar performance to ERA5 without downscaling. The choice of WRF physics parameterization schemes is shown to have a relatively large impact on the simulations of SEB components, but a smaller impact on the modeled total melt energy. The results increase our confidence in dynamical downscaling with WRF for long-term glacier melt modeling in this region.
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 | 0.003 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.029 | 0.025 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.135 | 0.112 |
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".