Improving the Explicit Prediction of Freezing Rain in a Kilometer-Scale Numerical Weather Prediction Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A freezing rain event, in which the Meteorological Centre of Canada’s 2.5-km numerical weather prediction system significantly underpredicted the quantity of freezing rain, is examined. The prediction system models precipitation types explicitly, directly from the Milbrandt–Yau microphysics scheme. It was determined that the freezing rain underprediction for this case was due primarily to excessive refreezing of rain, originating from melting snow and graupel, in and under the temperature inversion of the advancing warm front ultimately depleting the supply of rain reaching the surface. The refreezing was caused from excessive collisional freezing between rain and graupel. Sensitivity experiments were conducted to examine the effects of a temperature threshold for collisional freezing and on varying the values of the collection efficiencies between rain and ice-phase hydrometeors. It was shown that by reducing the rain–graupel collection efficiency and by imposing a temperature threshold of −5°C, above which collisional freezing is not permitted, excessive rain–graupel collection and graupel formation can be controlled in the microphysics scheme, leading to an improved simulation of freezing rain at the surface.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".