MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138159159 · doi:10.1175/2007jas2509.1

On the Climate Impact of Surface Roughness Anomalies

2008· article· en· W2138159159 on OpenAlexaff
D. B. Kirk‐Davidoff, David W. Keith

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Atmospheric Sciences · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTropical and Extratropical Cyclones Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCarnegie Mellon UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMagnitude (astronomy)ClimatologySurface roughnessAtmospheric sciencesSurface finishAtmosphere (unit)Roughness lengthAnomaly (physics)Climate modelEnvironmental scienceGeologyCloud coverScale (ratio)MeteorologyClimate changeWind speedMaterials scienceWind profile power lawPhysicsAstrophysicsCloud computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Large-scale deployment of wind power may alter climate through alteration of surface roughness. Previous research using GCMs has shown large-scale impacts of surface roughness perturbations but failed to elucidate the dynamic mechanisms that drove the observed responses in surface temperature. Using the NCAR Community Atmosphere Model in both its standard and aquaplanet forms, the authors have explored the impact of isolated surface roughness anomalies on the model climate. A consistent Rossby wave response in the mean winds to roughness anomalies across a range of model implementations is found. This response generates appreciable wind, temperature, and cloudiness anomalies. The interrelationship of these responses is discussed, and it is shown that the magnitude of the responses scales with the horizontal length scale of the roughened region, as well as with the magnitude of the roughness anomaly. These results are further elucidated through comparison with results of a series of shallow-water model experiments.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations110
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Atmospheric SciencesSame topicTropical and Extratropical Cyclones ResearchFrench-language works237,207