MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152378104 · doi:10.1175/2010jamc2508.1

Lagrangian Coherent Structure Analysis of Terminal Winds Detected by Lidar. Part I: Turbulence Structures

2010· article· en· W2152378104 on OpenAlexaff
Wenbo Tang, Pak Wai Chan, George Haller

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsAzimuthTurbulenceAirflowLidarLyapunov exponentMeteorologyWind shearLagrangian coherent structuresDivergence (linguistics)VortexGeologyFlow (mathematics)PhysicsMechanicsWind speedRemote sensingOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The accurate real-time detection of turbulent airflow patterns near airports is important for safety and comfort in commercial aviation. In this paper, a method is developed to identify Lagrangian coherent structures (LCS) from horizontal lidar scans at Hong Kong International Airport (HKIA) in China. LCS are distinguished frame-independent material structures that create localized attraction, repulsion, or high shear of nearby trajectories in the flow. As such, they are the fundamental structures behind airflow patterns such as updrafts, downdrafts, and wind shear. Based on a recently developed finite-domain–finite-time Lyapunov exponent (FDFTLE) algorithm from Tang et al. and on new Lagrangian diagnostics presented in this paper that are pertinent to the extracted FDFTLE ridges, the authors differentiate LCS extracted from lidar data. It is found that these LCS derived from horizontal lidar scans compare well to convergence and divergence suggested by vertical slice scans. At HKIA, horizontal scans are predominant: they cover much bigger azimuthal ranges as compared with only two azimuthal angles from the vertical scans. LCS extracted from horizontal scans are thus advantageous in providing organizing turbulence structures over the entire observational domain as compared with a single line along the vertical scan direction. In Part II of this study, the authors will analyze the evolution of LCS and their impacts on landing aircraft based on recorded flight data.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations52
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Meteorology and ClimatologySame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207