MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126871307 · doi:10.5539/esr.v4n1p68

Sensitivity of UV-B Irradiance to Cloud Optical Depth and Droplets Equivalent Radii

2015· article· en· W2126871307 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Jacqueline Binyamin

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth Science Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric aerosols and clouds
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOvercastIrradianceZenithOptical depthAtmospheric radiative transfer codesSolar zenith angleRadiative transferRADIUSEffective radiusPhysicsLatitudeCloud coverSensitivity (control systems)Environmental scienceAtmospheric sciencesComputational physicsOpticsAstrophysicsMeteorologyCloud computingAstronomySky

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The DIScrete Ordinate Radiative Transfer (DISORT) and the delta-Eddington models were used to evaluate the relationship between cloud optical depth, tc and direct, diffuse and global transmitted irradiances in the UV-B region for various solar zenith angles (SZAs), two values of cloud droplet equivalent radius, re (7mm and 10mm) and two cases of low (? = 0.05) and high (? = 0.75) albedos under overcast conditions. The study shows that the delta-Eddington model is not suitable for calculating direct and diffuse components separately but it is suitable for calculating diffuse irradiances for overcast conditions for two cases only at northern latitudes where SZAs are large and at southern Canada wheretc values are always greater than 10. The delta-Eddington model is accurate when calculating the global fluxes anywhere, although it overestimates by an average of 6%. Global transmittance is greater by 7% for smaller droplet sizes (re = 7µm) for both cases of low (? = 0.05) and high (? = 0.75) albedos.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarth Science ResearchSame topicAtmospheric aerosols and cloudsFrench-language works237,207