MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2577990050 · doi:10.1002/met.1613

Snowfall rate estimation using C‐band polarimetric radars

2017· article· en· W2577990050 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueMeteorological Applications · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPrecipitation Measurement and Analysis
Canadian institutionsImpactBarrie Urology GroupYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNowcastingSnowRadarRemote sensingMeteorologyPolarimetryEnvironmental sciencePrecipitationWeather radarAlgorithmComputer scienceGeologyGeographyScatteringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: Radar quantitative precipitation estimation plays an important role in weather forecasting, nowcasting and hydrological models. This study evaluates the Sekhon and Srivastava (1970) snow water equivalent ( SWE ) algorithm currently implemented by the Canadian Radar Network of Environment and Climate Change Canada, suggests an improved algorithm and also evaluates the ability of polarimetric radars in estimating SWE . The radar data were collected from the dual polarimetric King City radar ( CWKR ) near Toronto, Ontario, and the Doppler Holyrood radar ( CWTP ) in Newfoundland. SWE data were collected at Oakville, Ontario, at Pearson International Airport ( CYYZ ), Toronto, Ontario, and at Mount Pearl, Newfoundland. The ground observations show that the polarimetric variables could be used to infer a few of the microphysical processes during snowfall. It is suggested that the co‐polar correlation co‐efficient ( ρ hv ) could be sensitive to the size ranges of different snow habits. Also, higher differential reflectivity ( Z dr ) values were measured with large aggregates. The results show a severe underestimation of SWE rates by the Sekhon and Srivastava algorithm. One hour accumulations from each site were used to develop SWE ( Z eH ) and SWE ( Z eH , Z DR ) algorithms ( Z eH and Z DR are the reflectivity factor and differential reflectivity, respectively). Similarly, algorithms were developed using SWE at 10 min intervals from CYYZ and Mount Pearl but these algorithms appeared to overestimate SWE . The hourly SWE accumulations from the three sites were combined to produce an additional SWE ( Z eH ) algorithm which showed better statistical results. A modest difference was found between the conventional and polarimetric algorithms for estimating snowfall amounts ( SWE ).

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)0.001
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 score0.351
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.220 · 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