Mesoscale Modeling of Boundary Layer Refractivity and Atmospheric Ducting
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this study four mesoscale forecasting systems were used to investigate the four-dimensional structure of atmospheric refractivity and ducting layers that occur within evolving synoptic conditions over the eastern seaboard of the United States. The aim of this study was to identify the most important components of forecasting systems that contribute to refractive structures simulated in a littoral environment. Over a 7-day period in April–May of 2000 near Wallops Island, Virginia, meteorological parameters at the ocean surface and within the marine atmospheric boundary layer (MABL) were measured to characterize the spatiotemporal variability contributing to ducting. By using traditional statistical metrics to gauge performance, the models were found to generally overpredict MABL moisture, resulting in fewer and weaker ducts than were diagnosed from vertical profile observations. Mesoscale features in ducting were linked to highly resolved sea surface temperature forcing and associated changes in surface stability and to local variations in internal boundary layers that developed during periods of offshore flow. Sensitivity tests that permit greater mesoscale detail to develop on the model grids revealed that initialization of the simulations and the resolution of sea surface temperature analyses were critical factors for accurate predictions of coastal refractivity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 it