Impact of Wind Direction, Wind Speed, and Particle Characteristics on the Collection Efficiency of the Double Fence Intercomparison Reference
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The accurate measurement of snowfall is important in various fields of study such as climate variability, transportation, and water resources. A major concern is that snowfall measurements are difficult and can result in significant errors. For example, collection efficiency of most gauge–shield configurations generally decreases with increasing wind speed. In addition, much scatter is observed for a given wind speed, which is thought to be caused by the type of snowflake. Furthermore, the collection efficiency depends strongly on the reference used to correct the data, which is often the Double Fence Intercomparison Reference (DFIR) recommended by the World Meteorological Organization. The goal of this study is to assess the impact of weather conditions on the collection efficiency of the DFIR. Note that the DFIR is defined as a manual gauge placed in a double fence. In this study, however, only the double fence is being investigated while still being called DFIR. To address this issue, a detailed analysis of the flow field in the vicinity of the DFIR is conducted using computational fluid dynamics. Particle trajectories are obtained to compute the collection efficiency associated with different precipitation types for varying wind speed. The results show that the precipitation reaching the center of the DFIR can exceed 100% of the actual precipitation, and it depends on the snowflake type, wind speed, and direction. Overall, this study contributes to a better understanding of the sources of uncertainty associated with the use of the DFIR as a reference gauge to measure snowfall.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".