MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088097365 · doi:10.1117/12.977574

Recent observations of clouds and precipitation by the airborne precipitation radar 2<sup>nd</sup>generation in support of the GPM and ACE missions

2012· article· en· W2088097365 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Stephen L. Durden, Simone Tanelli, E. Im

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPrecipitation Measurement and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJet Propulsion Laboratory
KeywordsGlobal Precipitation MeasurementRadarPrecipitationEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingMeteorologyDoppler radarComputer scienceGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Ku-/Ka-band, Doppler, scanning, polarimetric airborne radar, known as the Airborne Dual-Frequency Precipitation Radar (APR-2) has been collecting data since 2001 in support of many spaceborne instruments and missions aiming at the observation of clouds and precipitation (e.g., TRMM, AMSR-E, GPM, CloudSat, ACE). The APR-2 suite of processing and retrieval algorithms (ASPRA) produces Level 1 (L1) products, microphysical classification and retrievals, and wind intensity estimates. ASPRA was also generalized to operate on an arbitrary set of radar configuration parameters to study the expected performance of multi-frequency spaceborne cloud and precipitation radars such as the GPM DPR (Global Precipitation Measurement mission, Dual-Frequency Precipitation Radar) and a notional radar for the Aerosol/Clouds/Ecosystem (ACE) mission. In this paper we illustrate the unique dataset collected during the Global Precipitation Measurement Cold-season Precipitation Experiment (GCPEx, US/Canada Jan/Feb 2012). We will focus on the significance of these observations for the development of algorithms for GPM and ACE, with particular attention to classification and retrievals of frozen and mixed phase hydrometeors.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.532
Threshold uncertainty score0.422

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations8
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicPrecipitation Measurement and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207