Assessing the predictive capability of several machine learning algorithms to forecast snow avalanches using numerical weather prediction model in eastern Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Snow avalanches are a serious threat to traffic in the northern Gaspésie region. In this study, we look at the development of different forecasting models using machine learning (ML), based on snow avalanche events recorded by Québec's Ministry of Transportation, meteorological data from the Cap-Madeleine station and Environment Canada weather forecast data. The models were trained and tested on Train and Test datasets with meteorological and weather forecasts recorded at the Meteorological Station. Unsupervised learning models were compared to expert models where only 4 variables were selected with avalanche expertise in mind, yielding similar results in prediction. The ML models were then tested in a realistic forecasting context over the year 2019 with weather data from a forecasting station (Hindcast) and with weather forecast data over 24 and 48 h. The LR and RF models show that model performance can match or exceed that of current forecasting tools, enhancing hazard anticipation while maintaining a user-friendly framework suitable for real-time application. In conclusion, recommendations on forecast-based operational procedures are proposed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".