MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1536258309 · doi:10.1029/2003gl017192

Sensitivity study of the spectral dispersion of the cloud droplet size distribution on the indirect aerosol effect

2003· article· en· W1536258309 on OpenAlexaffabout
Yiran Peng, Ulrike Lohmann

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric aerosols and clouds
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud albedoAerosolAtmospheric sciencesDispersion (optics)Albedo (alchemy)Liquid water contentEnvironmental scienceScalingAtmosphere (unit)Cloud computingMeteorologyComputational physicsCloud coverPhysicsOpticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To study the influence of anthropogenic aerosols on the shape of the cloud droplet size spectra (dispersion effect), we analyze observed liquid water cloud data during two Canadian field studies. Scaled by the parameter β, which is a function of the relative dispersion of cloud droplet spectra, the calculated cloud albedo shows better agreement with the independently measured cloud albedo than the cloud albedo calculated without scaling. The scaling factor β is positively correlated with the cloud droplet number concentration. A linear relationship between β and the cloud droplet number concentration obtained from different field studies is applied to the ECHAM4 general circulation model. The global mean indirect aerosol effect at the top of atmosphere including the dispersion effect is reduced by 0.2 W m−2 as compared to the reference simulation. This accounts for about 1/3 of the reduction that needed to be imposed on the simulated anthropogenic indirect aerosol effect by Lohmann and Lesins [2002] .

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations133
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicAtmospheric aerosols and cloudsFrench-language works237,207