MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7100265377

3 Improved Mapping of Snow Water Equivalent over Quebec

2015· article· en· W7100265377 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWater equivalentSnowPrecipitationSnow coverKrigingGrid
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This extended abstract describes initial results from a project to develop 10-km resolution gridded maps of SWE over Québec from historical surface observations of snow depth and SWE. The project has assembled an historical snow course database for Quebec and surrounding regions containing ~145,000 observations covering the period 1936-2006. The SWE observations are interpolated to a 10 km grid using the method of kriging with external drift (KED) following Tapsoba et al. (2005) with topography and estimated SWE as external drift variables. The estimated SWE field is generated using precipitation from the CANGRD product (Milewska et al., 2005) and 6-hourly air temperatures from the NCEP reanalysis. The results of an initial evaluation showed the KED method provided spatially realistic SWE fields over Quebec with a number of improvements over the optimal-interpolation approach used in Brown et al. (2003). While the distribution of the available surface observations is quite variable in space and time there are sufficient observations to generate SWE maps for most of Quebec from about the mid-1960s for the 1st and 15th of the month from December to June.

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)0.001
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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.182 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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