MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163512993 · doi:10.1029/2002jd003322

A fast, flexible, approximate technique for computing radiative transfer in inhomogeneous cloud fields

2003· article· en· W2163512993 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric aerosols and clouds
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiative transferCloud computingStatistical physicsBenchmark (surveying)Radiative fluxParametrization (atmospheric modeling)Scale (ratio)Sampling (signal processing)Computer scienceComputational physicsPhysicsEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyApplied mathematicsRemote sensingMathematicsGeologyOpticsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Radiative transfer schemes in large‐scale models tightly couple assumptions about cloud structure to methods for solving the radiative transfer equation, which makes these schemes inflexible, difficult to extend, and potentially susceptible to biases. A new technique, based on simultaneously sampling cloud state and spectral interval, provides radiative fluxes that are guaranteed to be unbiased with respect to the benchmark Independent Column Approximation and works equally well no matter how cloud structure is specified. Fluxes computed in this way are subject to random, uncorrelated errors that depend on the distribution of cloud optical properties. Seasonal forecasts, however, are not sensitive to this noise, making the method useful in weather and climate prediction models.

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.

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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.270
Threshold uncertainty score0.607

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.284 · 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