MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968772981 · doi:10.1029/2008jd011130

Parameterization of visibility in snow: Application in numerical weather prediction models

2009· article· en· W1968772981 on OpenAlexaffabout
Faisal S. Boudala, George A. Isaac

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric aerosols and clouds
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsSnowEnvironmental scienceWind speedRelative humidityMeteorologyLinear regressionAtmospheric sciencesVisibilityPhysicsMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several parameterizations of extinction coefficient (σ) and visibility (lv) as a function of temperature (T), liquid water equivalent snowfall rate (S), have been developed assuming a gamma size distribution for ice particles and using aircraft data collected in extratropical stratiform clouds. Using surface‐based measurements (SBM) of S, T, relative humidity (RH), cloud ceiling (lce), and σ during the winter months in 2005, 2006, and 2007 at the Centre for Atmospheric Research Experiments site in Ontario, Canada, other parameterizations have been developed and compared with that based on the aircraft data. The analysis of the SBM data indicates that low lv is mainly associated with S. Both aircraft and SBM data indicate that there is a significant dependence of lv on S and a relatively weaker dependence on T. The observed lv is correlated with lce, but the dependence of lv on RH is relatively weak. There is some nonlinear dependence of lv on wind speed. Using SBM, several parameterizations of σ have been developed using a multiple linear regression method by increasing the number of terms starting with S. The addition of T increases the correlation coefficient (CC) r from 0.85 to 0.87. The addition of RH has no significant effect, but the inclusion of lce further improves the CC from 0.87 to 0.9. It was also found that both lv and lce can be described well using the inverse Gaussian probability density function. Model predictions using these parameterizations show that, when the model correctly forecasts the precipitation field, the predicted lv agreed well with observations.

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)0.005
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations22
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicAtmospheric aerosols and cloudsFrench-language works237,207