MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980625737 · doi:10.1175/bams-d-19-0033.1

Megaflashes: Just How Long Can a Lightning Discharge Get?

2019· article· en· W2980625737 on OpenAlexaff
Walter Lyons, Eric C. Bruning, Tom A. Warner, Donald R. MacGorman, Samantha Edgington, Clemens E. Tillier, Janusz Młynarczyk

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of the American Meteorological Society · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLightning and Electromagnetic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
FundersNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationDefense Advanced Research Projects AgencyUniversidade de São PauloUniversity of ArizonaTexas Tech UniversityMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationIowa State UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsLightning detectionSprite (computer graphics)Mesoscale meteorologyMeteorologyUpper-atmospheric lightningLightning (connector)Mesoscale convective systemGeostationary orbitGeologyPeak currentLightning strikeThunderstormEnvironmental scienceGeographyPhysicsComputer scienceAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The existence of mesoscale lightning discharges on the order of 100 km in length has been known since the radar-based findings of Ligda in the mid-1950s. However, it took the discovery of sprites in 1989 to direct significant attention to horizontally extensive “megaflashes” within mesoscale convective systems (MCSs). More recently, 3D Lightning Mapping Arrays (LMAs) have documented sprite-initiating lightning discharges traversing several hundred kilometers. One such event in a 2007 Oklahoma MCS having an LMA-derived length of 321 km, has been certified by the WMO as the longest officially documented lightning flash. The new Geostationary Lightning Mapper (GLM) sensor on GOES-16/17 now provides an additional tool suited to investigating mesoscale lightning. On 22 October 2017, a quasi-linear convective system moved through the central United States. At 0513 UTC, the GLM indicated a lightning discharge originated in northern Texas, propagated north-northeast across Oklahoma, fortuitously traversed the Oklahoma LMA (OKLMA), and finally terminated in southeastern Kansas. This event is explored using the OKLMA, the National Lightning Detection Network (NLDN), and the GLM. The NLDN reported 17 positive cloud-to-ground flashes (+CGs), 23 negative CGs (−CGs), and 37 intracloud flashes (ICs) associated with this massive discharge, including two +CGs capable of inducing sprites, with others triggering upward lightning from tall towers. Combining all available data confirms the megaflash, which illuminated 67,845 km2, was at least 500 km long, greatly exceeding the current official record flash length. Yet even these values are being superseded as GLM data are further explored, revealing that such vast discharges may not be all that uncommon.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.008
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.201 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations31
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of the American Meteorological SocietySame topicLightning and Electromagnetic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207