9B.6 ANALYSIS OF MCV TORNADOES THROUGH STORM-SCALE DATA ASSIMILATION AND SIMULATIONS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
* On 9 May 2007, several brief tornadoes struck parts of southwest and central Oklahoma. The tornadoes were caused by a strong mesoscale convective vortex (MCV; e.g., Menard and Fritsch 1989) that moved through the region. The first tornado caused EF-1 damage in Grady County, near Minco, OK. Another weak tornado produced EF-0 damage near Union City, OK, in Canadian County. The most destructive tornado, a high-end EF-1, hit El Reno, OK causing an estimated three million U.S. dollars in damage. Two brief EF-1 tornadoes were reported shortly after 0500 UTC 9 May 2007 near Piedmont, OK. On 4 May 2007, a shortwave trough associated with a 150-kt jet streak propagated southward along the west coast of the United States. A downstream ridge in the Mississippi Valley, and a high-over-low blocking pattern aloft along the east coast of the US prevented the west coast shortwave trough from moving eastward. As a result, by 0000 UTC 7 May 2007, a highamplitude longwave trough developed in the southwest US. Several shortwave troughs moved through the longwave trough into the Southern and Central Plains. The shortwave troughs resulted in a series of mesoscale convective systems (MCSs) that moved through the southern plains during the period 7-10 May 2007. One of these MCSs developed on themorning of 8 May 2007 in far eastern portions of New Mexico in an area of upslope flow and moisture advection. Upperlevel divergence associated with a shortwave trough ejecting from the longwave trough in the southwestern US aided in this thunderstorm development. The thunderstorm complex grew in areal extent and was located from southwest Oklahoma south to near Del Rio, TX, at 0000 UTC 9 May 2007. The Texas portion of the MCS began to dissipate shortly after 0000 UTC, while new supercell-like development in southwest Oklahoma allowed the northern portion of the MCS to persist until around 0700 UTC.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 teacher head, 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".