Comparison of Evaporation and Cold Pool Development between Single-Moment and Multimoment Bulk Microphysics Schemes in Idealized Simulations of Tornadic Thunderstorms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Idealized simulations of the 3 May 1999 Oklahoma tornadic supercell storms are conducted at various horizontal grid spacings ranging from 1 km to 250 m, using a sounding extracted from a prior 3-km grid spacing real-data simulation. A sophisticated multimoment bulk microphysics parameterization scheme capable of predicting up to three moments of the particle or drop size distribution (DSD) for several liquid and ice hydrometeor species is evaluated and compared with traditional single-moment schemes. The emphasis is placed on the impact of microphysics, specifically rain evaporation and size sorting, on cold pool strength and structure, and on the overall reflectivity structure of the simulated storms. It is shown through microphysics budget analyses and examination of specific processes within the low-level downdraft regions that the multimoment scheme has important advantages, which lead to a weaker and smaller cold pool and better reflectivity structure, particularly in the forward-flank region of the simulated supercells. Specifically, the improved treatment of evaporation and size sorting, and their effects on the predicted rain DSDs by the multimoment scheme helps to control the cold bias often found in the simulations using typical single-moment schemes. The multimoment results are more consistent with observed (from both fixed and mobile mesonet platforms) thermodynamic conditions within the cold pools of the discrete supercells of the 3 May 1999 outbreak.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".