MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129641766 · doi:10.1029/2007gl031536

Considerations for spaceborne 94 GHz radar observations of precipitation

2007· article· en· W2129641766 on OpenAlexaff
Pavlos Kollias, Wanda Szyrmer, Isztar Zawadzki, Paul Joe

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPrecipitation Measurement and Analysis
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadarSnowPrecipitationRemote sensingEnvironmental scienceSampling (signal processing)Doppler radarGlobal Precipitation MeasurementRain and snow mixedAttenuationMeteorologyGeologyComputer scienceOpticsPhysicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spaceborne 94 GHz radars offer sufficient sensitivity to observe all types of precipitation and their associated clouds without stretching the instrument requirements. In this study, considerations for precipitation classification and detection from space using 94 GHz radars are presented. First, a technique that uses the path‐integrated attenuation normalized to the depth of the rain layer, the snow‐integrated reflectivity and the reflectivity difference from snow to rain to discriminate convective and stratiform profiles is proposed. Second, we present a critical view of sampling issues for precipitation and Doppler measurements from space at 94 GHz. A new sampling strategy for spaceborne 94 GHz radars with alternating cloud and precipitation modes is discussed that can improve our ability to detect and measure precipitation without losing sight of the main objective of deploying such high frequency radars in space, to map the global distribution of clouds.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations20
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicPrecipitation Measurement and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207