Turbulent Heat Fluxes during an Extreme Lake-Effect Snow Event
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Proper modeling of the turbulent heat fluxes over lakes is critical for accurate predictions of lake-effect snowfall (LES). However, model evaluation of such a process has not been possible because of the lack of direct flux measurements over lakes. The authors conducted the first-ever comparison of the turbulent latent and sensible heat fluxes between state-of-the-art numerical models and direct flux measurements over Lake Erie, focusing on a record LES event in southwest New York in November 2014. The model suite consisted of numerical models that were operationally and experimentally used to provide nowcasts and forecasts of weather and lake conditions. The models captured the rise of the observed turbulent heat fluxes, while the peak values varied significantly. This variation resulted in an increased spread of simulated lake temperature and cumulative evaporation as the representation of the model uncertainty. The water budget analysis of the atmospheric model results showed that the majority of the moisture during this event came from lake evaporation rather than a larger synoptic system. The unstructured-grid Finite-Volume Community Ocean Model (FVCOM) simulations, especially those using the Coupled Ocean–Atmosphere Response Experiment (COARE)-Met Flux algorithm, presented better agreement with the observed fluxes likely due to the model’s capability in representing the detailed spatial patterns of the turbulent heat fluxes and the COARE algorithm’s more realistic treatment of the surface boundary layer than those in the other 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".