Simulating Arctic Ice Clouds during Spring Using an Advanced Ice Cloud Microphysics in the WRF Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two Types of Ice Clouds (TICs) have been characterized in the Arctic during the polar night and early spring. TIC-1 are composed by non-precipitating small ice crystals of less than 30 µm in diameter. The second type, TIC-2, are characterized by a low concentration of large precipitating ice crystals (>30 µm). Here, we evaluate the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model performance both in space and time after implementing a parameterization based on a stochastic approach dedicated to the simulation of ice clouds in the Arctic. Well documented reference cases provided us in situ data from the spring of 2008 Indirect and Semi-Direct Aerosol Campaign (ISDAC) campaign over Alaska. Simulations of the microphysical properties of the TIC-2 clouds on 15 and 25 April 2008 (polluted or acidic cases) and TIC-1 clouds on non-polluted cases are compared to DARDAR (raDAR/liDAR) satellite products. Our results show that the stochastic approach based on the classical nucleation theory, with the appropriate contact angle, is better than the original scheme in WRF model to represent TIC-1 and TIC-2 properties (ice crystal concentration and size) in response to the IN acidification.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".