Skip to content

Cookies 🍪

This site uses cookies that need consent.

Learn more

Zur Powderguide-Startseite Zur Powderguide-Startseite
mountain knowledge

The Quantitative Reduction Method (QRM): A first introduction

Exchange of ideas on avalanche prevention at the WSL Institute for Snow and Avalanche Research (SLF).

by Steffen Kruse 12/11/2018
"Is this usable for me or too technical?" - These were exactly the thoughts I had when I received an invitation from the SLF to give a presentation on skitourenguru.ch and the quantitative reduction method (QRM). I had had no previous contact with the QRM and the Skitourenguru platform was also largely unknown to me.

I attended the event to get first-hand information about QRM and to be able to ask questions about it. The lecturers were Günter Schmudlach (recently interviewed by SnowFlurry), the initiator of Skitourenguru.ch and the QRM, and Kurt Winkler, avalanche warden at the SLF, mountain guide and author of the training manuals Bergsport Sommer and Bergsport Winter. Günter quit his job as a software developer in 2012 and started developing an algorithm for avalanche prevention instead. The result is a platform that evaluates ski tours on a daily basis based on the avalanche bulletin and the terrain. The first version was ready for use in 2014/15 and caused a lot of discussion among experts. Skitourenguru has since grown into an established platform and is supported by strong partners. The Swiss Alpine Club (SAC) recommends the platform for tour planning. As of this winter, the evaluation of Skitourenguru is based on the QRM.

But what is it actually about?

Simply put, the QRM is based on the automated evaluation of data on ski touring routes and avalanche accidents. 48,000 kilometers of GPS tracks and 1,469 avalanche accidents registered in Switzerland were "scanned" and evaluated in more detail. The findings make it possible to assign a risk to every point in the terrain.

In contrast to the classic graphical reduction method (GRM), however, the QRM allows the estimation of quantitative risk relations. The terrain is therefore not simply divided into classes, but each point is assigned a continuous risk. In the risk map, this is expressed by color transitions, shown here in the hazard map.

mountain knowledge
presented by

To derive this, it was first calculated for each of the almost 1500 avalanche accidents whether they occurred in typical avalanche terrain (terrain indicator, determined from a digital terrain model) and how high the avalanche danger was (danger indicator, determined from the avalanche bulletin from the previous evening). The terrain and danger indicators were then also calculated for each point on the GPS ski tour tracks. The QRM avalanche risk is the result of dividing the accident and access densities determined in this way.

At first glance, the QRM is similar to the graphical reduction method. However, it shows that the risk increases extremely sharply in the red zone - and that this zone can be predicted quite well using the terrain model and avalanche bulletin alone. For example, 2% of the distances traveled can be assigned to 50% of the accidents. QRM is suitable for machine applications. In addition to route evaluation, it enables many other applications, such as the creation of daily updated risk maps.

If you want to know more, you can find a detailed explanation of the QRM here: Quantitative Risk Reduction Method (QRM), a data-driven avalanche risk estimator

Is this too technical for me or is it still usable?

It doesn't matter whether the derivation is too technical and abstract for me or not. What counts for me personally is the objective pursued and the result. This is clearly about supporting winter sports enthusiasts in their tour planning. Which ski tour suits the current conditions? Answering this question is not easy. An experienced ski tourer might think: "I don't need that, I've managed without it so far. This new-fangled stuff...!"

But isn't this thinking already the first big mistake? Shouldn't we be using all the good, new and proven options to protect ourselves from excessive risks on a tour day?"

In my opinion, QRM is a big step in the right direction. However, it is by no means a substitute for further sound planning before the tour, a watchful eye during the tour and a healthy gut feeling. Otherwise, in my opinion, there is nothing to be said against applying complex knowledge simply and quickly for a well-prepared ski tour.

Or as Kurt Winkler says:

The aim of this method is to achieve a lot of safety with little sacrifice through optimal planning. Or vice versa: to achieve the greatest possible safety with good planning and a certain amount of sacrifice.

This article has been automatically translated by DeepL with subsequent editing. If you notice any spelling or grammatical errors or if the translation has lost its meaning, please write an e-mail to the editors.

Show original (German)

Related articles

Comments

mountain knowledge
presented by