MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030559577 · doi:10.1029/2006gl026638

A simulation of a lake effect snowstorm with a cloud resolving numerical model

2006· article· en· W2030559577 on OpenAlexaff
Takeshi Maesaka, G. W. K. Moore, Q. Liu, Kazuhisa Tsuboki

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWinter stormMeteorologySnowConvectionEnvironmental scienceConvective storm detectionClimatologyGeologyStormSevere weatherComputer simulationAtmospheric sciencesGeographyComputer scienceSimulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lake‐effect snowstorms (LES), linearly organized bands of convective clouds, are a major source of snowfall and severe weather in the North American Great Lakes region. LES develop as cold and dry air flows over the warm lake surfaces triggering convection that is often organized into quasi‐linear structures known as band clouds. The small horizontal width of these bands, often less than 5 km, combined with their regional‐scale evolution that is impacted by the distribution of open water, lake‐ice and land makes the forecasting of LES particularly challenging. Here, we describe the simulation of an observed LES event using a cloud resolving numerical model in a domain that includes much of the Great Lakes region. The model was able to successfully capture many of the characteristics associated with the event. This simulation suggests that it soon may be possible to forecast the development of this class of convective weather systems.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations23
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsFrench-language works237,207