A 9‐year summary of radar characteristics of mesocyclonic storms and of deep convection in southern Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Nine summers of reflectivity and Doppler data, (1993–2001), archived by the Marshall Radar Observatory of McGill University have been processed for the purpose of identifying the location, strength and frequency of occurrence of severe weather events associated with convective activity. A mesocyclone detection and tracking algorithm has identified 329 features with a lifetime of at least 10 minutes. The distribution of their duration, path length, diameter, depth, rotational velocity and shear are provided, as well as their hourly and monthly frequency. Their geographical distribution reveals an increased relative probability of occurrence over the western area of the McGill radar coverage as well as to the north, near Mirabel, and a reduced probability of occurrence near the metropolitan area of Montréal. The analysis of deep convection has been performed in terms of upper level Vertically Integrated Liquid water content maps (UVIL) where the vertical integration of reflectivity begins at a height of 5 km. UVIL maps are preferred among other types of reflectivity‐based radar products because they are the least affected by radar artefacts such as bright band, ground echoes, anomalous propagation and beam blocking. An inherent bias, present in the standard generation of UVIL maps, and due to an oxygen attenuation overcorrection and to the vertical profile of reflectivity of thunderstorms as sampled by a broadening beamwidth, has been identified and corrected. The geographical distribution of UVIL measurements in terms of the time that a UVIL threshold of 10 and 15 kg m−2 is exceeded has been obtained for both the individual years and for the entire 9‐year period. Areas of preferred convection have been identified in the latter, particularly along the flatlands of the St. Lawrence River Basin. A relative minimum is quite noticeable along a broad corridor running north and south of the radar over heavily forested mountainous regions. This combination results in a non‐negligible correlation of the order of ‐0.2 between the height of the topography (m) and deep convection. Curves revealing the relative severity of the nine years in terms of a continuous UVIL threshold have also been derived. The years 1994, 1998 and 1999 emerged as the most active years while 1996 and 2000 were clearly very quiet.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".