Coastal Tropical Convection in a Stochastic Modeling Framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Recent research has suggested that the overall dependence of convection near coasts on large‐scale atmospheric conditions is weaker than over the open ocean or inland areas. This is due to the fact that in coastal regions convection is often supported by meso‐scale land‐sea interactions and the topography of coastal areas. As these effects are not resolved and not included in standard cumulus parametrization schemes, coastal convection is among the most poorly simulated phenomena in global models. To outline a possible parametrization framework for coastal convection we develop an idealized modeling approach and test its ability to capture the main characteristics of coastal convection. The new approach first develops a decision algorithm, or trigger function, for the existence of coastal convection. The function is then applied in a stochastic cloud model to increase the occurrence probability of deep convection when land‐sea interactions are diagnosed to be important. The results suggest that the combination of the trigger function with a stochastic model is able to capture the occurrence of deep convection in atmospheric conditions often found for coastal convection. When coastal effects are deemed to be present the spatial and temporal organization of clouds that has been documented form observations is well captured by the model. The presented modeling approach has therefore potential to improve the representation of clouds and convection in global numerical weather forecasting and climate models.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".