MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045884461 · doi:10.1029/2000gl011944

Cirrus horizontal inhomogeneity and OLR bias

2000· article· en· W2045884461 on OpenAlexaff
Qiang Fu, Betty Carlin, G. G. Mace

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric aerosols and clouds
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCirrusOutgoing longwave radiationTroposphereRadiative transferLongwaveEnvironmental scienceOptical depthAtmospheric sciencesHorizontal planeCloud coverMeteorologyPhysicsCloud computingConvectionGeologyOpticsGeodesy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The outgoing longwave radiation (OLR) bias due to the neglect of cloud horizontal inhomogeneities has been examined in this study. It is argued that this OLR bias is most significant for semi‐transparent cirrus clouds that are located in the cold upper troposphere. Using two cirrus cases observed from cloud radar, it is found that the OLR biases due to the plane‐parallel homogeneous assumption are ∼14 W m−2. These biases are largely caused by the horizontal variation of cloud optical depth. It is also shown that in general the OLR biases are strongly dependent on the cloud height and mean and standard deviation of cloud optical depth. We have demonstrated that the gamma‐weighted radiative transfer scheme, which is efficient for GCM applications, can be used to account for the effect of cloud horizontal inhomogeneity on the infrared fluxes.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations59
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicAtmospheric aerosols and cloudsFrench-language works237,207