The Impacts of Changing Winter Warm Spells on Snow Ablation Over Western North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract An increase in winter air temperature can amplify snowmelt and sublimation in mountain regions with implications to water resources and ecological systems. Winter Warm Spells (WWS) are defined as a winter period (December to February, DJF) of at least 3 consecutive days with daily maximum temperature anomaly above the 90th percentile (using a moving‐average of 15 days between 2001 and 2013). We calculate WWS for every 4‐km grid cell within an atmospheric model over western North America to characterize WWS and analyze snow ablation and their changes in a warmer climate. We find that days with ablation during WWS represent a small fraction of winter days (0.6 days), however, 49% of total winter ablation (33.4 mm/DJF) occurs during WWS. Greater extreme ablation rates (99th percentile) occur 18% more frequently during WWS than during non‐WWS days. Ablation rates during WWS in humid regions are larger (9 mm d −1 ) than in dry regions (7 mm d −1 ) in a warmer climate, which can be explained by differences in the energy balance and the snowpack's cold content. We find that warmer (0.8°C), longer (1.8 days) and more frequent (3.7 more events) WWS increase total winter ablation (on average 109% or 18 mm/DJF) in a warmer climate. Winter melt during WWS in warm and humid places is expected to increase about 3 times more than in the cold and dry region. This study provides a comprehensive description of WWS and their impact on snowpack dynamics, which is relevant to reservoir operations and water security.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".