Synoptic Control over Orographic Precipitation Distributions during the Olympics Mountains Experiment (OLYMPEX)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The synoptic controls on orographic precipitation during the Olympics Mountains Experiment (OLYMPEX) are investigated using observations and numerical simulations. Observational precipitation retrievals for six warm-frontal (WF), six warm-sector (WS), and six postfrontal (PF) periods indicate that heavy precipitation occurred in both WF and WS periods, but the latter saw larger orographic enhancements. Such enhancements extended well upstream of the terrain in WF periods but were focused over the windward slopes in both PF and WS periods. Quasi-idealized simulations, constrained by OLYMPEX data, reproduce the key synoptic sensitivities of the OLYMPEX precipitation distributions and thus facilitate physical interpretation. These sensitivities are largely explained by three upstream parameters: the large-scale precipitation rate [Formula: see text], the impinging horizontal moisture flux I, and the low-level static stability. Both WF and WS events exhibit large [Formula: see text] and I, and thus, heavy orographic precipitation, which is greatly enhanced in amplitude and areal extent by the seeder–feeder process. However, the stronger stability of the WF periods, particularly within the frontal inversion (even when it lies above crest level), causes their precipitation enhancement to weaken and shift upstream. In contrast, the small [Formula: see text] and I, larger static stability, and absence of stratiform feeder clouds in the nominally unsaturated and convective PF events yield much lighter time- and area-averaged precipitation. Modest enhancements still occur over the windward slopes due to the local development and invigoration of shallow convective showers.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".