Life Cycle of Numerically Simulated Shallow Cumulus Clouds. Part II: Mixing Dynamics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper is the second in a two-part series in which life cycles of six numerically simulated shallow cumulus clouds are systematically examined. The six clouds, selected from a single realization of a large-eddy simulation, grow as a series of pulses/thermals detached from the subcloud layer. All six clouds exhibit a coherent vortical circulation and a low buoyancy, low velocity trailing wake. The ascending cloud top (ACT), which contains this vortical circulation, is associated with a dynamic perturbation pressure field with high pressure located at the ascending frontal cap and low pressure below and on the downshear side of the maximum updrafts. Examination of the thermodynamic and kinematic structure, together with passive tracer experiments, suggests that this vortical circulation is primarily responsible for mixing between cloud and environment. As the cloud ACTs rise through the sheared environment, the low pressure, vortical circulation, and mixing are all strongly enhanced on the downshear side and weakened on the upshear side. Collapse of the ACT also occurs on the downshear side, with subsequent thermals ascending on the upshear side of their predecessors. The coherent core structure is maintained throughout the ACT ascent; mixing begins to gradually dilute the ACT core only in the upper half of the cloud's depth. The characteristic kinematic and dynamic structure of these simulated ACTs, together with their mixing behavior, corresponds closely to that of shedding thermals. These shallow simulated clouds, however, reach a maximum height of only about four ACT diameters so that ACT mixing differs from predictions of self-similar laboratory thermals.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".