MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164320060 · doi:10.1175/jas-d-14-0357.1

Clarification of the Water Saturation Represented on Ice Crystal Growth Diagrams

2015· article· en· W2164320060 on OpenAlexafffund
Médéric St-Pierre, Julie M. Thériault

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Atmospheric Sciences · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric aerosols and clouds
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesUniversité du Québec à Montréal
KeywordsSupersaturationSaturation (graph theory)Water vaporRelative humidityIce crystalsVapor pressureHumidityAtmospheric sciencesThermodynamicsEnvironmental scienceMaterials scienceMeteorologyGeologyPhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been known for a long time that the shape of ice crystals depends on both the air temperature and the relative humidity of the environment. The relationships among these factors have been summarized in classification diagrams and are intensively referred to in the cloud physics literature. To put in perspective the atmospheric conditions in which the different ice crystal habits grow with respect to the level of saturation in the atmosphere, the vapor density excess and supersaturation with respect to ice at liquid water saturation have been included on those diagrams as a function of air temperature. Over the years, the definition of the water saturation included in those types of diagrams has been misdefined. The goal of this study is to show that an error has been introduced in the definition of the excess of water vapor with respect to ice.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.233
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Atmospheric SciencesSame topicAtmospheric aerosols and cloudsFrench-language works237,207