MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1624519712

Anatomy of cirrus clouds

2004· article· en· W1624519712 on OpenAlexaff
J. A. Whiteway, C. Cook, M. W. Gallagher, R. Busen, T. W. Choularton, Keith Bower, Paul Connolly, Michael Flynn, Jörg Hacker

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Explorer (The University of Manchester) · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric aerosols and clouds
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCirrusIce crystalsThunderstormLidarOutflowCloud physicsCloud heightGeologyAtmospheric sciencesMeteorologyLatitudeCloud topRemote sensingEnvironmental scienceGeographyCloud coverCloud computingPhysicsAstronomySatelliteGeodesy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Emerald airborne measurement campaigns have provided a view of the anatomy of cirrus clouds in both the tropics and mid-latitudes. These experiments have involved two aircraft that probe cirrus clouds from outside and from within. One aircraft, the Egrett, flew within the cloud with instruments for in-situ sampling of ice crystals, humidity, and turbulence. Another aircraft, the King Air, flew directly below the cloud with an upward viewing lidar to map the cloud structure. The airborne lidar measurements were used as a guide for the experimenters to conduct flight patterns with the Egrett sampling at various altitudes within the same cirrus fall-streaks. Results are presented here from two separate flights: one in frontal cirrus above Adelaide, Australia, and the other in the cirrus outflow from convection above Darwin. Recorded images of ice crystals are shown in relation to the cloud structure measured by the lidar. In mid-latitude frontal cirrus, columnar and irregular ice crystals were observed throughout the cloud while rosettes were found only at the top. The cirrus outflow from tropical thunderstorms was found to be composed of similar shapes in addition to hexagonal plates and large crystal aggregates. As the cloud drifted away from the convection the plates and smaller aggregates were found at the top while large aggregates had sedimented to lower regions of the cloud.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.281
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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Explorer (The University of Manchester)Same topicAtmospheric aerosols and cloudsFrench-language works237,207