Numerical analysis using WRF‐SBM for the cloud microphysical structures in the C3VP field campaign: Impacts of supercooled droplets and resultant riming on snow microphysics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two distinct snowfall events are observed over the region near the Great Lakes during 19–23 January 2007 under the intensive measurement campaign of the Canadian CloudSat/CALIPSO validation project (C3VP). These events are numerically investigated using the Weather Research and Forecasting model coupled with a spectral bin microphysics (WRF‐SBM) scheme that allows a smooth calculation of riming process by predicting the rimed mass fraction on snow aggregates. The fundamental structures of the observed two snowfall systems are distinctly characterized by a localized intense lake‐effect snowstorm in one case and a widely distributed moderate snowfall by the synoptic‐scale system in another case. Furthermore, the observed microphysical structures are distinguished by differences in bulk density of solid‐phase particles, which are probably linked to the presence or absence of supercooled droplets. The WRF‐SBM coupled with Goddard Satellite Data Simulator Unit (G‐SDSU) has successfully simulated these distinctive structures in the three‐dimensional weather prediction run with a horizontal resolution of 1 km. In particular, riming on snow aggregates by supercooled droplets is considered to be of importance in reproducing the specialized microphysical structures in the case studies. Additional sensitivity tests for the lake‐effect snowstorm case are conducted utilizing different planetary boundary layer (PBL) models or the same SBM but without the riming process. The PBL process has a large impact on determining the cloud microphysical structure of the lake‐effect snowstorm as well as the surface precipitation pattern, whereas the riming process has little influence on the surface precipitation because of the small height of the system.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".