MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038305315 · doi:10.1364/ao.44.005565

Multiple-scattering-based lidar retrieval: method and results of cloud probings

2005· article· en· W2038305315 on OpenAlexaff
Luc Bissonnette, G. Roy, Nathalie Roy

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Optics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric aerosols and clouds
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScatteringLidarOpticsMie scatteringForward scatterExtinction (optical mineralogy)Remote sensingLight scatteringWavelengthComputational physicsPhysicsScattering theoryComputer scienceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent developments in the search for a practical method of exploiting the multiple-scattering contributions to lidar returns are consolidated in a robust retrieval algorithm. The theoretical basis is the small-angle diffusion approximation. This implies that the algorithm is limited to media of sufficient optical thickness to generate measurable multiple scattering and to geometries for which the receiver's footprint diameter is less than the scattering mean free path. The primary retrieval products are the range-resolved extinction coefficient and the effective particle diameter from which secondary products such as the particle volume mixing ratio and the extinction at other wavelengths can be calculated. We recall briefly earlier validation tests and present new data and analysis that demonstrate and quantify the solutions' accuracy. The results show that systematic lidar probings with the proposed multiple-scattering technique can provide valuable physical information on cloud formation and evolution.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied OpticsSame topicAtmospheric aerosols and cloudsFrench-language works237,207