Intercomparison and Interpretation of Single-Column Model Simulations of a Nocturnal Stratocumulus-Topped Marine Boundary Layer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Ten single-column models (SCMs) from eight groups are used to simulate a nocturnal nonprecipitating marine stratocumulus-topped mixed layer as part of an intercomparison organized by the Global Energy and Water Cycle Experiment Cloud System Study, Working Group 1. The case is idealized from observations from the Dynamics and Chemistry of Marine Stratocumulus II, Research Flight 1. SCM simulations with operational resolution are supplemented by high-resolution simulations and compared with observations and large-eddy simulations. All participating SCMs are able to maintain a sharp inversion and a mixed cloud-topped layer, although the moisture profiles show a slight gradient in the mixed layer and produce entrainment rates broadly consistent with observations, but the liquid water paths vary by a factor of 10 after only 1 h of simulation at both high and operational resolution. Sensitivity tests show insensitivity to activation of precipitation and shallow convection schemes in most models, as one would observationally expect for this case.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".