The Role of Cloud-Top Generating Cells and Boundary Layer Circulations in the Finescale Radar Structure of a Winter Cyclone over the Great Lakes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Data from airborne W-band radar are used in conjunction with thermodynamic fields from the Weather Research and Forecasting Model and air-parcel back trajectories from the HYSPLIT model to investigate the finescale reflectivity, vertical motion, and airmass structure of the comma head of a winter cyclone in the vicinity of the Great Lakes. Cloud-top generating cells formed along an upper-level frontal boundary vertically separating dry air, which 48 h earlier was located in the upper troposphere over south-central Canada, from moist air, which was located in the lower troposphere over the southeast United States. The stronger updrafts within the generating cells had vertical velocities ranging from 1 to 3 m s−1. The generating cells were important to precipitation production within the comma head. Precipitation trails formed within the generating cells could sometimes be followed to the boundary layer before merging. Boundary layer air beneath the cyclone’s comma head exhibited convective circulations and was turbulent. Gravity waves were sometimes observed at the base of the stable layer atop the convective boundary layer. Trajectory analyses showed that boundary layer air sampled by radar beneath the aircraft path had a history of crossing the Great Lakes. The magnitude of updrafts and downdrafts in the boundary layer were 1–2 m s−1, while wave circulations exhibited maximum updrafts and downdrafts of ~3 m s−1. The tops of some boundary layer convective circulations and gravity waves exhibited enhancements in radar reflectivity. The data presented illustrate the impact of the Great Lakes on cyclone mesostructure during the passage of a cyclone through the region.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".