MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Multifractal Analysis of Line-Source Plume Concentration Fluctuations in Surface-Layer Flows

2001· article· en· W2103642581 on OpenAlexaff
Dennis Finn, Brian Lamb, Monique Y. Leclerc, S. Lovejoy, Sean Pecknold, Daniel Schertzer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Meteorology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultifractal systemPlumeScalar (mathematics)Line sourceTurbulenceTRACEREnvironmental scienceSurface layerStatistical physicsMechanicsGeologyMeteorologyPhysicsMathematicsMaterials scienceFractalLayer (electronics)Mathematical analysisGeometryOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A codimension multifractal methodology was used to analyze and to model scalar concentration fluctuations within sulfur hexafluoride tracer gas plumes from a line source in atmospheric surface-layer flows. Correspondence was exhibited between the double trace moments parameters α and C1 of the codimension methodology and the experimentally measured plume concentration characteristics of peak-to-mean ratio and concentration fluctuation intensity. Data series were generated using an extremal Levy, stochastic multifractal model, with the experimental α and C1 as inputs. Uncertainties in experimentally determined plume characteristic values overlapped the uncertainties in model-simulated values. The utility of the procedure includes 1) characterizing the state of scalar turbulent mixing, 2) helping to evaluate and to model hazardous plume concentrations, and 3) being able to estimate the probability of realizing extreme events at timescales of observation beyond or at magnitudes in excess of those present in the actual observations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations23
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied MeteorologySame topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207