MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969653808 · doi:10.1002/qj.147

<i>In situ</i> measurements of liquid water content profiles in midlatitude stratiform clouds

2007· article· en· W1969653808 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Alexei Korolev, George A. Isaac, J. W. Strapp, Stewart G. Cober, Howard W. Barker

Bibliographic record

VenueQuarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric aerosols and clouds
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersNational Research Council Canada
KeywordsLiquid water contentMiddle latitudesSupercoolingEnvironmental scienceLiquid waterIcingAtmospheric sciencesIn situIce crystalsMeteorologyGeologyMaterials sciencePhysicsCloud computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Statistical characteristics of 584 liquid water content (LWC) profiles collected mainly in midlatitude supercooled stratiform frontal clouds during five field campaigns are presented. It has been found that the majority (55%) of liquid layers have thickness less than 500 m and the depth of these layers decreases with decreasing temperature. LWC profiles for thin cloud layers are usually close to quasi‐adiabatic, whereas for thick clouds they are approximately constant with an average LWC value close to 0.14 g m−3. Good agreement was observed between cumulative distributions for liquid water paths derived from in situ LWC profiles and those inferred in previous experiments from ground‐based 37 GHz radiometers. Copyright © 2007 Crown in the right of Canada. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

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)0.000
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations90
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological SocietySame topicAtmospheric aerosols and cloudsFrench-language works237,207