MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1570025454 · doi:10.1029/2010gl046016

Evidence of liquid dependent ice nucleation in high-latitude stratiform clouds from surface remote sensors

2011· article· en· W1570025454 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gijs de Boer, Hugh Morrison, Matthew D. Shupe, R. Hildner

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric aerosols and clouds
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsIce nucleusSea ice growth processesSea iceGeologyArctic ice packMicrowave radiometerAtmospheric sciencesArcticSea ice thicknessSea ice concentrationNucleationLidarAntarctic sea iceSupersaturationEnvironmental scienceClimatologyRadiometerRemote sensingOceanographyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

[1] Ground-based lidar, radar and microwave radiometer observations at Eureka, Canada, Barrow, Alaska and over the western Arctic Ocean measure physical characteristics and morphology of stratiform clouds. Despite transition of a cold atmosphere (−15 C)through ice supersaturated conditions, ice is not observed until soon after a liquid layer. Several cases illustrating this phenomenon are presented in addition to long-term observations from three measurement sites characterizing cloud phase frequency. This analysis demonstrates that clouds composed entirely of ice occur less frequently than liquid-topped mixed-phase clouds at temperatures warmer than −25 to −30 C. These results indicate ice formation generally occurs in conjunction with liquid at these temperatures, and suggest the importance of liquid-dependent ice nucleation mechanisms.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations287
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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