q 2004 American Meteorological Society Modeling Forest Cover Influences on Snow Accumulation, Sublimation, and Melt
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A comprehensive, physically based model of snow accumulation, redistribution, sublimation, and melt for open and forested catchments was assembled, based on algorithms derived from hydrological process research in Russia and Canada. The model was used to evaluate the long-term snow dynamics of a forested and an agricultural catchment in northwestern Russia without calibration from snow observations. The model was run with standard meteorological variables for the two catchments, and its results were tested against regular surface observations of snow accumulation throughout the winter and spring period for 17 seasons. The results showed mean errors in comparison to observations of less than 3 % in estimating snow water equivalent during the winter and melt seasons. Snow surface evaporation and blowing snow were found to be small components of the mass balance, but intercepted snow sublimation removed notable amounts of snow over the winter from the forested catchment. Average snow accumulation was 15 % higher in the open catchment, largely due to a lack of intercepted snow sublimation. Melt rates were 23 % higher in the open than in the forest, but the effect on melt duration was suppressed by the smaller premelt accumulation in the forest. Only a moderate sensitivity of snow accu-mulation to forest leaf area was found, while a substantial variation was observed from season to season with changing weather patterns. This suggests that the ensemble of snow processes is more sensitive to variations in atmospheric processes than in vegetation cover. The success in using algorithms from both Canada and Russia in modeling snow dynamics suggests that there may be a potential for large-scale transferability of the modeling techniques. 1.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".