MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988926450 · doi:10.1175/jas-d-12-029.1

Predictability of Precipitation from Continental Radar Images. Part V: Growth and Decay

2012· article· en· W1988926450 on OpenAlexaff
Basivi Radhakrishna, Isztar Zawadzki, Frédéric Fabry

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Atmospheric Sciences · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPredictabilityPrecipitationNowcastingAdvectionScalingRadarClimatologyScale (ratio)Environmental scienceExponential decayAtmospheric sciencesPhysicsGeologyComputational physicsMeteorologyMathematicsStatisticsComputer scienceGeometryNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In a Lagrangian frame of reference, the accuracy of rainfall systems predicted by nowcasting algorithms can be improved by incorporating the growth and decay of the rainfall. The scale dependence of predictability of growth and decay of continental-scale precipitating systems is studied with the help of the U.S. national radar composites. The growth and decay of precipitating systems is estimated in a time interval τ by correcting the precipitation image for advection and rotation at time t + τ with respect to the precipitation image at time t and then subtracting the former from the latter. Results show that the two-dimensional correlation of growth and decay has an elliptical structure, indicating that growth and decay is nonisotropic. The probability density function of precipitation intensities and of growth and decay follows a Gaussian distribution. The scale-dependence analysis of growth and decay patterns indicates that the growth and decay of rainfall may be predictable up to about 2 h for scales larger than 250 km.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.715

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations52
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Atmospheric SciencesSame topicMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsFrench-language works237,207