MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2536453356 · doi:10.1175/mwr-d-16-0072.1

Structure and Evolution of a Warm Frontal Precipitation Band during the GPM Cold Season Precipitation Experiment (GCPEx)

2016· article· en· W2536453356 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Brian A. Colle, Aaron Naeger, Andrew Molthan

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Weather Review · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrecipitationClimatologyEnvironmental scienceGlobal Precipitation MeasurementMeteorologyAtmospheric sciencesGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper describes the evolution of an intense precipitation band associated with a relatively weak warm front observed during the Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM) Mission Cold Season Precipitation Experiment (GCPEx) over southern Ontario, Canada, on 18 February 2012. The warm frontal precipitation band went through genesis, maturity, and decay over a 5–6-h period. The Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) Model nested down to 1-km grid spacing was able to realistically predict the precipitation band evolution, albeit somewhat weaker and slightly farther south than observed. Band genesis began in an area of precipitation with embedded convection to the north of the warm front in a region of weak frontogenetical forcing at low levels and a weakly positive to slightly negative moist potential vorticity (MPV*) from 900 to 650 hPa. A midlevel dry intrusion helped reduce the midlevel stability, while the precipitation band intensified as the low-level frontogenesis intensified in a sloping layer with the warm front. Aggregates of unrimed snow occurred within the band during early maturity, while more supercooled water and graupel occurred as the upward motion increased because of the frontogenetical circulation. As the low-level cyclone moved east, the low-level deformation decreased and the column stabilized for vertical and slantwise ascent, and the warm frontal band weakened. A WRF experiment turning off latent heating resulted in limited precipitation band development and a weaker warm front, while turning off latent cooling only intensified the frontal precipitation band as additional midlevel instability compensated for the small decrease in frontogenetical forcing.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Weather ReviewSame topicMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsFrench-language works237,207