MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2418543131 · doi:10.2514/6.2016-4059

Isokinetic TWC Evaporator Probe: Development of the IKP2 and Performance Testing for the HAIC-HIWC Darwin 2014 and Cayenne Field Campaigns

2016· article· en· W2418543131 on OpenAlexafffund
J. W. Strapp, Lyle Lilie, Thomas Ratvasky, Craig R. Davison, Chris Dumont

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIcing and De-icing Technologies
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
FundersTransport CanadaNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsDarwin (ADL)Field (mathematics)Environmental scienceEngineeringMathematicsSystems engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new Isokinetic Total Water Content Evaporator (IKP2) was downsized from a prototype instrument, specifically to make airborne measurements of hydrometeor total water content (TWC) in deep tropical convective clouds to assess the new ice crystal Appendix D icing envelope. The probe underwent numerous laboratory and wind tunnel investigations to ensure reliable operation under the difficult high altitude/speed/TWC conditions under which other TWC instruments have been known to either fail, or have unknown performance characteristics. The article tracks the testing and modifications of the IKP2 probe to ensure its readiness for three flight campaigns in 2014 and 2015. Comparisons are made between the IKP2 and the NASA Icing Research Tunnel reference values in liquid conditions, and to an exploratory technique estimating ice water content from a bulk ice capture cylinder method in glaciated conditions. These comparisons suggest that the initial target of 20% accuracy in TWC has been achieved and likely exceeded for tested TWC values in excess of about 0.5/cu gm. Uncertainties in the ice water content reference method have been identified. Complications are introduced in the necessary subtraction of an independently measured background water vapor concentration, errors of which are small at the colder flight temperatures, but increase rapidly with increasing temperature, and ultimately limit the practical use of the instrument in a tropical convective atmosphere to conditions colder than about 0 C. A companion article in this conference traces the accuracy of the components of the IKP2 to derive estimated system accuracy.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations67
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIcing and De-icing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207