MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063728222 · doi:10.1029/2008jd010927

Study of polar thin ice clouds and aerosols seen by CloudSat and CALIPSO during midwinter 2007

2009· article· en· W2063728222 on OpenAlexafffund
Patrick Grenier, Jean‐Pierre Blanchet, Rodrigo Muñoz‐Alpizar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric aerosols and clouds
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsLidarAerosolEffective radiusEnvironmental scienceIce crystalsAtmospheric sciencesPolarArcticSatelliteMeteorologyClimatologyRemote sensingGeologyPhysicsOceanographyAstrophysicsAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data sets from CloudSat radar reflectivity and CALIPSO lidar backscattering measurements provide a new regard on Arctic and Antarctic winter cloud systems, as well as on the way aerosols determine their formation and evolution. Especially, links between the cloud ice crystal size and the surrounding aerosol field may be further investigated. In this study, the satellite observations are used to heuristically separate polar thin ice clouds into two crystal size categories, and an aerosol index based on the attenuated backscattering and color ratio of the sampled volumes is used for identifying haze in cloud‐free regions. Statistics from 386 Arctic satellite overpasses during January 2007 and from 379 overpasses over Antarctica during July 2007 reveal that sectors with the highest proportion of thin ice clouds having large ice crystals at their top are those for which the aerosol index is highest. Moreover, a weak but significant correlation between the cloud top ice effective radius and the above‐cloud aerosol index suggests that more polluted clouds tend to have higher ice effective radius, in 10 of the 11 sectors investigated. These results are interpreted in terms of a sulphate‐induced freezing inhibition effect.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.251
Threshold uncertainty score0.678

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations51
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicAtmospheric aerosols and cloudsFrench-language works237,207