MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4414099904 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-2025-3979

Bias-adjusted projections of snow cover over eastern Canada using an ensemble of regional climate models

2025· preprint· en· W4414099904 on OpenAlexaffabout
Émilie Bresson, Éric Dupuis, Pascal Bourgault

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsOuranos
FundersU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsSnowSnow coverContext (archaeology)Climate changeClimate modelPrecipitationSeasonality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. In the context of climate change, stakeholders and decision makers need easily accessible bias-adjusted projections of snow cover and indices produced from those to develop adaptation plans. To meet this need, we produced an ensemble of regional climate projections statistically bias adjusted of snow water equivalent (SWE) in the province of Québec, Canada. This bias adjustment required some fine-tuning to operational methods, mainly due to the seasonality in the SWE. We calculated indices of interest for several sectors based on the bias-adjusted SWE. These indices included the maximum of SWE as well as the duration, start, and end of the snow season, and the days without snow cover. In eastern Canada, snow cover tended to persist for shorter periods as the climate warms, with symmetrical shrinkage at the beginning and the end of the snow season, with the exception of the Nunavik region. The maximum SWE was projected to decrease in the southern part of the domain and increase elsewhere. The snow season in the Côte-Nord, southern Québec and St-Lawrence River Valley regions would be increasingly interrupted by sequences of days without snow cover, whereas this would not be the case for the northern and central Québec 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)0.001
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.152
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.122 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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