MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150313828 · doi:10.1029/2001gl014153

Time‐series of zenith radiance and surface flux under cloudy skies: Radiative smoothing, optical thickness retrievals and large‐scale stationarity

2002· article· en· W2150313828 on OpenAlexaff
Christian von Savigny, Anthony B. Davis, O. Funk, Klaus Pfeilsticker

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric aerosols and clouds
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadianceRadiative transferZenithRadiative fluxSmoothingEnvironmental scienceAtmospheric radiative transfer codesScale (ratio)Flux (metallurgy)Solar zenith angleRemote sensingPhysicsAtmospheric sciencesOpticsGeologyMaterials scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cloudy sky zenith radiance time‐series covering spatial scales a few meters up to 200–400 km measured by a ground‐based photometer at 753 nm are investigated with 2nd‐order structure functions, and compared to broad‐band short‐wave column transmittance. A previously reported scale break occurs at scales on the order of the vertical cloud extension due to radiative smoothing (i.e., lateral photon transport by diffusion in optically thick clouds). We use simulated radiance and flux fields for 3D clouds to explain why optical depths can be extracted with reasonable accuracy from surface fluxes by using 1D radiative transfer theory at large‐enough scales. We also show clear evidence of a transition from nonstationary to stationary behavior, i.e., a scale break, occurring at spatial scales of a few tens of kilometers. We argue that this qualitative change in the correlations of remotely observed radiation fields is likely to carry over to the most highly variable inherent cloud property, namely optical depth.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.755
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.252 · 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.

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

Citations16
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicAtmospheric aerosols and cloudsFrench-language works237,207