MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Spiral Bands in a Simulated Hurricane. Part I: Vortex Rossby Wave Verification

2001· article· en· W2070770613 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Atmospheric Sciences · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTropical and Extratropical Cyclones Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEyeRossby wavePotential vorticityVortexMesoscale meteorologyMechanicsPhysicsRainbandVorticitySpiral (railway)GeologyAtmospheric sciencesMeteorologyTropical cycloneConvection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An initially axisymmetric hurricane was explicitly simulated using the high-resolution PSU–NCAR nonhydrostatic mesoscale model (MM5). Spiral potential vorticity (PV) bands that formed in the model were analyzed. It was shown that PV bands and cloud bands are strongly coupled. The PV anomalies in and at the top of the boundary layer interact with friction to produce upward motion that gives rise to the inner cloud bands. The propagation properties of the PV bands were studied and found to be consistent with predictions of vortex Rossby wave theory. In the control simulation with full physics, continuous generation of PV through latent heat release in the eyewall and spiral rainbands maintain a “bowl-shape” PV field. Inward transport of high PV by the vortex Rossby waves and the process of nonlinear mixing tend to increase the inner-core PV and in turn intensify the hurricane. On the other hand, frictional and PV mixing processes acted linearly to spin down the hurricane to a midlevel vortex in a dry run, which indicates that a monopolar PV structure is the asymptotic stable state in the absence of condensation.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.217 · 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