MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021573377 · doi:10.1175/jas-d-12-0285.1

Snow Studies. Part III: Theoretical Derivations for the Ensemble Retrieval of Snow Microphysics from Dual-Wavelength Vertically Pointing Radars

2013· article· en· W2021573377 on OpenAlexaff
Wanda Szyrmer, Isztar Zawadzki

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Atmospheric Sciences · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowEnvironmental scienceRadarRange (aeronautics)MeteorologyParticle (ecology)Atmospheric sciencesComputational physicsPhysicsRemote sensingGeologyMaterials scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract As a first step toward retrieval of snow microphysics from two vertically pointing radars operating at X band and W band, a theoretical model of snow microphysics is formulated in which the number of unknown parameters is reduced to snow particle density and to two bulk quantities controlling the particle size distribution. This reduction of parameters is achieved by normalizing not only the size distribution but also the snow particle mass in the mass–size relationship as well as by using a relationship between snow density and snow terminal fall velocity. However, no single snow microphysical model could describe the observed variability in the radar measurements. The uncertainty in the developed deterministic relations that map the microphysical parameters to the observables is shown to be mainly associated with the assumed dependence of particle velocity on its mass and on the particle size distribution (PSD) representation. Hence, various mass–velocity relationships together with different generic functional forms of the PSD reported in literature are described in this paper and then used in the retrieval. The derived relations provide a reasonable range of uncertainty associated with the microphysics when used for the actual retrieval of snow properties from observations in Part IV. The uncertainty in the backscattering computations of an individual particle, performed using Mie theory assuming spherical form with nonuniform density, is not taken into account in this study.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations15
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Atmospheric SciencesSame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207