MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134523807 · doi:10.1175/jas3800.1

A Diagnostic Study of Waves on the Tropopause

2006· article· en· W2134523807 on OpenAlexafffund
Yoshihiro Tomikawa, K. Sato, Theodore G. Shepherd

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Atmospheric Sciences · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of TorontoCanadian Space AgencyJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyCanadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
KeywordsTropopauseStratosphereTroposphereRossby waveAtmospheric sciencesClimatologyMaximaGeologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The spatial structure and phase velocity of tropopause disturbances localized around the subpolar jet in the Southern Hemisphere are investigated using 6-hourly European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts reanalysis data covering 15 yr (1979–93). The phase velocity and phase structure of the tropopause disturbances are in good agreement with those of an edge wave vertically trapped at the tropopause. However, the vertical distribution of the ratio of potential to kinetic energy exhibits maxima above and below the tropopause and a minimum around the tropopause, in contradiction to edge wave theory for which the ratio is unity throughout the troposphere and stratosphere. This difference in vertical structure between the observed tropopause disturbances and edge wave theory is attributed to the effects of a finite-depth tropopause together with the next-order corrections in Rossby number to quasigeostrophic dynamics.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations11
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Atmospheric SciencesSame topicAtmospheric Ozone and ClimateFrench-language works237,207