MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2046336178 · doi:10.5194/acpd-12-30021-2012

The albedo properties of four clean stratocumulus clouds studied during the VOCALS-REX field campaign

2012· article· en· W2046336178 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ben Parkes, Phil Rosenberg, Alan Gadian, Alan Blyth, J. Latham

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric aerosols and clouds
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of ManchesterFund for Innovative Climate and Energy ResearchNatural Environment Research CouncilMet OfficeUniversity of CalgaryNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMarine stratocumulusShortwaveAlbedo (alchemy)Environmental scienceAtmospheric sciencesDrizzleZenithRadiometerSolar zenith angleCloud albedoMeteorologyOvercastCirrusTransectRadiative transferCloud computingCloud coverGeologyRemote sensingAerosolGeographyPhysicsOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The VOCALS-REx field campaign which took place in 2008 used several platforms to investigate the persistent marine stratocumulus cloud deck off the Chilean and Peruvian coasts. VOCALS-UK was the UK component of the experiment, during which the FAAM BAe-146 aircraft gathered data in the stratocumulus cloud. It flew 13 research flights including investigations along 20° S transects. In this paper, the shortwave cloud albedo derived from the Cloud Droplet Probe is compared with the albedo measured from two shortwave radiometers. Four clean cloud segments were selected for investigation. The suitability of the δ-Eddington approximation as a method of calculating shortwave albedo is investigated and it is found to be acceptable (with a R2 of 0.78) for solar zenith angles below 65 degrees.

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)0.000
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAtmospheric aerosols and clouds→French-language works237,207→