MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4411265242 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2024-0716

Understanding the influence of thermal properties and surface conditions on thermal modelling results at two permafrost sites

2025· article· en· W4411265242 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Konstantin Ozeritskiy, Jocelyn L. Hayley

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaTransport Canada
KeywordsPermafrostSnowEnvironmental scienceThermalSnow coverAtmospheric sciencesGeologySoil scienceMeteorologyGeomorphologyGeographyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study evaluates the thermal behavior of permafrost under varying surface boundary conditions at a specific site on the Yamal Peninsula, focusing on the impact of snow cover depth, wind speed, and soil thermal properties through one-dimensional thermal modeling. For comparison purposes, a site at the Hudson Bay Lowland with lower snow accumulation was also included to assess the influence of differing snow conditions on thermal dynamics. The analysis highlights the sensitivity of thermal models to surface condition measurements, emphasizing that even small errors in snow cover estimation can significantly affect simulated ground temperatures. While soil thermal properties remain influential, their impact is comparatively less pronounced than variations in snow cover. Results indicate that inaccuracies in snow cover measurements, particularly during atypical winters, can lead to substantial deviations in modeled thermal fields. These findings underscore the importance of refining surface condition measurements to enhance the reliability of thermal modeling in permafrost regions.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.138 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical Journal→Same topicClimate change and permafrost→French-language works237,207→