MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139080985 · doi:10.5194/angeo-22-4025-2004

An attempt to calibrate the UHF strato-tropospheric radar at Arecibo using NexRad radar and disdrometer data

2004· article· en· W2139080985 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Pétronille Kafando, M. Petitdidier

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnales Geophysicae · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPrecipitation Measurement and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOffice National d'études et de Recherches AérospatialesMcGill UniversityCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueAgence Universitaire de la FrancophonieClemson UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsDisdrometerRadarRemote sensingMeteorologyEnvironmental scienceRadiosondeUltra high frequencyTroposphereGeologyComputer sciencePhysicsRain gauge

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The goal of this paper is to present a methodology to calibrate the reflectivity of the UHF Strato-Tropospheric (ST) radar located at NAIC in Puerto Rico. The UHF lower relevant altitude is at 5.9km, the melting layer being at around 4.8km. The data used for the calibration came from the observations of clouds, carried out with Strato-Tropospheric dual-wavelength (UHF and VHF) radars and a disdrometer; those instruments being located on the NAIC site in Arecibo, Puerto Rico. The National Weather Service operates other instruments like the radiosondes and the NexRad Radar in other sites. The proposed method proceeds in two steps. The first consists of the comparison between the NexRad reflectivity and the reflectivity computed from the drop size distributions measured by the disdrometer for one day with a noticeable rainfall rate. In spite of the distance of both instruments, the agreement between the reflectivities of both instruments is enough good to be used as a reference for the UHF ST radar. The errors relative at each data set is found to be 2.75dB for the disdrometer and 4dB for the NexRad radar, following the approach of Hocking et al. (2001). The inadequacy between the two sampled volume is an important contribution in the errors. The second step consists of the comparison between the NexRad radar reflectivity and the UHF non-calibrated reflectivity at the 4 altitudes of common observations during one event on 15 October 1998. Similar features are observed and a coefficient is deduced. An offset around 4.7dB is observed and the correlation factor lies between 0.628 and 0.730. According to the errors of the data sets, the precision on the calibration is of the order of 2dB. This method works only when there are precipitation hydrometeors above the NAIC site. However, the result of the calibration could be applied to other data obtained during the campaign, the only constraint being the same value of the transmitter power. Key words. Meteorology and atmospheric dynamics (tropical meteorology; remote sensing; instruments and techniques)

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.285
Threshold uncertainty score0.519

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnales GeophysicaeSame topicPrecipitation Measurement and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207