FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4382242004> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4382242004 abstract "<strong class=journal-contentHeaderColor>Abstract.</strong> Consistent estimates of avalanche size are crucial for communicating among avalanche practitioners, but also between avalanche forecasters and the public, as for instance in public avalanche forecasts. Moreover, applications such as risk management and numerical avalanche simulations rely on accurately mapped outlines of past avalanche events. Since there is no widely applicable and objective way to measure avalanche size nor to determine the outlines of an avalanche, humans estimate these. Therefore, knowing about the reliability of avalanche size estimates and avalanche outlines is essential as errors will impact applications relying on this kind of data. Conducting three user studies, we investigate the reliability in avalanche size estimates and avalanche outlines either mapped from oblique photographs or from remotely-sensed imagery. We compare size estimates for 10 avalanches made by 170 avalanche professionals working in Europe or North America, the mappings of six avalanches from oblique photographs from 10 participants, and the mappings of avalanches visible on 2.9 km² of remotely-sensed imagery in four different spatial resolutions from five participants. We observed an average agreement in the avalanche size estimated by the majority of respondents of 66 %, while agreement with the avalanche size considered «correct» was 74 %. Moreover, European avalanche practitioners rated avalanches significantly larger for eight out of 10 avalanches, compared to North Americans. For the outlines mapped from oblique photographs, we noted a mean overlapping proportion of 52 % for any two avalanche mappings and 60 % compared to a reference mapping. The outlines mapped from remotely-sensed imagery had a mean overlapping proportion of 46 % (image resolution 2 m) to 68 % (25 cm) between any two mappings, and 64 % (2 m) to 80 % (25 cm) when compared to the reference. Assuming that participants are equally competent in the estimation of avalanche size or the determination of avalanche outlines, we calculated a score describing the factor required to obtain the proportion of agreements between any two size estimates or overlap in avalanche areas. This factor was 0.72 for avalanche size estimates in our data set. It can be regarded as the certainty related to a size estimate by an individual, and thus provides an indication of the reliability of a label. The presented findings demonstrate that the reliability of size estimates and of mapped avalanche outlines is limited. As these data are often used as reference data or even ground truth to validate further applications, the discovered limitations and uncertainties may influence results and should be to be taken into account." @default.
• W4382242004 created "2023-06-28" @default.
• W4382242004 creator A5090758638 @default.
• W4382242004 date "2023-06-27" @default.
• W4382242004 modified "2023-10-14" @default.
• W4382242004 title "Reply on RC1" @default.
• W4382242004 doi "https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-586-ac1" @default.
• W4382242004 hasPublicationYear "2023" @default.
• W4382242004 type Work @default.
• W4382242004 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W4382242004 crossrefType "peer-review" @default.
• W4382242004 hasAuthorship W4382242004A5090758638 @default.
• W4382242004 hasBestOaLocation W43822420041 @default.
• W4382242004 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W4382242004 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W4382242004 hasConcept C153294291 @default.
• W4382242004 hasConcept C160697094 @default.
• W4382242004 hasConcept C163258240 @default.
• W4382242004 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W4382242004 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W4382242004 hasConcept C43214815 @default.
• W4382242004 hasConcept C62520636 @default.
• W4382242004 hasConceptScore W4382242004C121332964 @default.
• W4382242004 hasConceptScore W4382242004C138885662 @default.
• W4382242004 hasConceptScore W4382242004C153294291 @default.
• W4382242004 hasConceptScore W4382242004C160697094 @default.
• W4382242004 hasConceptScore W4382242004C163258240 @default.
• W4382242004 hasConceptScore W4382242004C41008148 @default.
• W4382242004 hasConceptScore W4382242004C41895202 @default.
• W4382242004 hasConceptScore W4382242004C43214815 @default.
• W4382242004 hasConceptScore W4382242004C62520636 @default.
• W4382242004 hasLocation W43822420041 @default.
• W4382242004 hasOpenAccess W4382242004 @default.
• W4382242004 hasPrimaryLocation W43822420041 @default.
• W4382242004 hasRelatedWork W1600457464 @default.
• W4382242004 hasRelatedWork W2016320391 @default.
• W4382242004 hasRelatedWork W2150654092 @default.
• W4382242004 hasRelatedWork W2169487643 @default.
• W4382242004 hasRelatedWork W2373158124 @default.
• W4382242004 hasRelatedWork W2385104873 @default.
• W4382242004 hasRelatedWork W2521124086 @default.
• W4382242004 hasRelatedWork W2529927477 @default.
• W4382242004 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W4382242004 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W4382242004 isParatext "false" @default.
• W4382242004 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W4382242004 workType "peer-review" @default.