MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014923363 · doi:10.1175/jamc-d-11-022.1

Characterization of Aircraft Icing Environments with Supercooled Large Drops for Application to Commercial Aircraft Certification

2011· article· en· W2014923363 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIcing and De-icing Technologies
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIcingIcing conditionsEnvironmental scienceSupercoolingLiquid water contentMeteorologyIce crystalsFreezing rainDrop (telecommunication)Atmospheric sciencesMaterials scienceSnowPhysicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Observations of aircraft icing environments that included supercooled large drops (SLD) greater than 100 μ m in diameter have been analyzed. The observations were collected by instrumented research aircraft from 134 flights during six field programs in three different geographic regions of North America. The research aircraft were specifically instrumented to accurately measure the microphysics characteristics of SLD conditions. In total 2444 SLD icing environments were observed at 3-km resolution. Each observation had an average liquid water content (LWC) > 0.005 g m −3 , drops > 100 μ m in diameter, ice crystal concentrations <1 L −1 , and an average static temperature ≤0°C. SLD conditions were observed approximately 5% of the in-flight time. The SLD observations were segregated into four subsets, which included conditions with maximum drop sizes <500 μ m and >500 μ m in diameter, each with median drop volume diameters <40 μ m and >40 μ m. For each SLD subset, the observations were used to develop envelopes of maximum LWC values as a function of horizontal extent and temperature. In addition, characteristic drop size distributions were developed for each SLD subset. The maximum LWC values physically represent either the 99% or 99.9% LWC values, as determined from an extreme value analysis of the data. The analysis is sufficient for simulation of SLD environments with either numerical icing accretion models or wind-tunnel icing simulations. The SLD envelopes are similar in structure and supplemental to existing aircraft icing envelopes, the difference being that the existing envelopes did not explicitly incorporate SLD conditions.

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.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.331
Threshold uncertainty score0.450

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.198 · 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