Sensitivity of mesoscale model urban boundary layer meteorology to the scale of urban representation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Mesoscale modeling of the urban boundary layer requires careful parameterization of the surface due to its heterogeneous morphology. Model estimated meteorological quantities, including the surface energy budget and canopy layer variables, will respond accordingly to the scale of representation. This study examines the sensitivity of the surface energy balance, canopy layer and boundary layer meteorology to the scale of urban surface representation in a real urban area (Detroit-Windsor (USA-Canada)) during several dry, cloud-free summer periods. The model used is the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model with its coupled single-layer urban canopy model. Some model verification is presented using measurements from the Border Air Quality and Meteorology Study (BAQS-Met) 2007 field campaign and additional sources. Case studies span from "neighborhood" (10 s ~308 m) to very coarse (120 s ~3.7 km) resolution. Small changes in scale can affect the classification of the surface, affecting both the local and grid-average meteorology. Results indicate high sensitivity in turbulent latent heat flux from the natural surface and sensible heat flux from the urban canopy. Small scale change is also shown to delay timing of a lake-breeze front passage and can affect the timing of local transition in static stability.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it