MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106621481 · doi:10.1175/2011jas3588.1

A New Parametric Model of Vortex Tangential-Wind Profiles: Development, Testing, and Verification

2011· article· en· W2106621481 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Vincent T. Wood, Luther W. White

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Atmospheric Sciences · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTropical and Extratropical Cyclones Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConcordia University
KeywordsVortexParametric statisticsMechanicsPhysicsWind tunnelVorticityWind speedMeteorologyRADIUSMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A new parametric model of vortex tangential-wind profiles is presented that is primarily designed to depict realistic-looking tangential wind profiles such as those in intense atmospheric vortices arising in dust devils, waterspouts, tornadoes, mesocyclones, and tropical cyclones. The profile employs five key parameters: maximum tangential wind, radius of maximum tangential wind, and three power-law exponents that shape different portions of the velocity profile. In particular, a new parameter is included controlling the broadly or sharply peaked profile in the annular zone of tangential velocity maximum. Different combinations of varying the model parameters are considered to investigate and understand their effects on the physical behaviors of tangential wind and corresponding vertical vorticity profiles. Additionally, the parametric tangential velocity and vorticity profiles are favorably compared to those of an idealized Rankine model and also those of a theoretical stagnant core vortex model in which no tangential velocity exists within a core boundary and a potential flow occurs outside the core. Furthermore, the parametric profiles are evaluated against and compared to those of two other idealized vortex models (Burgers–Rott and Sullivan). The comparative profiles indicate very good agreements with low root-mean-square errors of a few tenths of a meter per second and high correlation coefficients of nearly one. Thus, the veracity of the parametric model is demonstrated.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.150 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations80
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Atmospheric SciencesSame topicTropical and Extratropical Cyclones ResearchFrench-language works237,207