MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

On the Sensitivity of the Normalized Difference Snow Index to Metamorphic Changes Elicited in Dry and Wet Snowpacks

2025· article· W4416726960 on OpenAlexaff
Gladimir V. G. Baranoski, Petri M. Varsa

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowSnow coverMetamorphic rockSensitivity (control systems)SnowmeltGlobal warmingNatural hazard

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alterations in seasonal snow covers can have profound effects not only on the planet’s climate, biodiversity and fresh water supplies, but also on the occurrence of natural hazards like floods and avalanches. The mapping and monitoring of these alterations often rely on the calculation of spectral in-dices such as the NDSI (normalized difference snow index). Despite the extensive use of the NDSI in remote sensing applications, several aspects related to its sensitivity to changes in snow characteristics remain to be broadly unveiled. These changes can take place during environmentally-induced metamorphic processes, which are being accentuated by increasing global warming conditions. In this work, we systematically examine the impact that concomitant metamorphic changes on key nivological characteristics, namely grain size and density, can have on the NDSI of snowpacks with varying liquid water contents and irradiated from distinct light incidence directions. Our investigation is carried out through controlled in silico experiments conducted using a first-principles simulation framework supported by in situ measured data obtained from natural snowpacks.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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