MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7033986978

Snowstorm Blankets Midwestern U.S. : Image of the Day

2001· other· en· W7033986978 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of Miscellaneous Information (Royal Gardens Kew) · 2001
Typeother
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicConservation Techniques and Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWinter stormSnowStormRain and snow mixedMeltwaterSnowpackWater yearFoothills
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An early blast of wintry weather swept across the midwestern United States on November 27-28, 2001, leaving a wide swath of snow and ice on the ground extending from northern Texas up into the Dakotas and as far east as Michigan. Two inches of snow accumulated in the Texas panhandle while sleet and freezing rain glazed bridges and roads as far south as the Dallas-Fort Worth area. Meanwhile, more than 2 feet (0.61 meters) of snow fell in parts of the Dakotas, Wisconsin and Michigan. The town of Willmar, Minnesota, recorded an accumulation of 29 inches (74 cm) of snow. By December 1, the clouds had cleared enough to afford the Moderate-resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) this true-color view of the midwest. The wide swath of white snow, contrasted with the brownish colors of the bare surface, reveals the extent of the region affected by the snowstorm. This scene spans from Ontario, Canada, and Minnesota (upper right) westward across the Dakotas and Montana (upper left). Moving southward, we see the storm blanketed half of Nebraska and the northeast corner of Colorado (lower left). The Missouri River can be seen clearly winding its way southeastward through South Dakota. The Missouri also defines the border between Nebraska and Iowa. The Minnesota River can also be seen in southwestern Minnesota.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.534
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.5350.002

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.172 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of Miscellaneous Information (Royal Gardens Kew)Same topicConservation Techniques and StudiesFrench-language works237,207