Representation of Arctic mixed-phase clouds and the Wegener-Bergeron-Findeisen process in climate models: Perspectives from a cloud-resolving study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two types of Arctic mixed-phase clouds observed during the ISDAC and M-PACE field campaigns are simulated using a 3-dimensional cloud-resolving model (CRM) with size-resolved cloud microphysics. The modeled cloud properties agree reasonably well with aircraft measurements and surface-based retrievals. Cloud properties such as the probability density function (PDF) of vertical velocity (w), cloud liquid and ice, regimes of cloud particle growth, including the Wegener-Bergeron-Findeisen (WBF) process, and the relationships among properties/processes in mixed-phase clouds are examined to gain insights for improving their representation in General Circulation Models (GCMs). The PDF of the simulated w is well represented by a Gaussian function, validating, at least for arctic clouds, the subgrid treatment used in GCMs. The PDFs of liquid and ice water contents can be approximated by Gamma functions, and a Gaussian function can describe the total water distribution, but a fixed variance assumption should be avoided in both cases. The CRM results support the assumption frequently used in GCMs that mixed phase clouds maintain water vapor near liquid saturation. Thus, ice continues to grow throughout the stratiform cloud but the WBF process occurs in about 50% of cloud volume where liquid and ice co-exist, predominantly in downdrafts. In updrafts, liquid and ice particles grow simultaneously. The relationship between the ice depositional growth rate and cloud ice strongly depends on the capacitance of ice particles. The simplified size-independent capacitance of ice particles used in GCMs could lead to large deviations in ice depositional growth. Copyright 2011 by the American Geophysical Union.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".