MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999065794 · doi:10.1175/waf-d-19-0085.1

Characterizing and Predicting Marine Fog Offshore Newfoundland and Labrador

2020· article· en· W2999065794 on OpenAlexaffabout
George A. Isaac, T. Bullock, Steven Beale

Bibliographic record

VenueWeather and Forecasting · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsNewfoundland and Labrador Centre for Applied Health ResearchImpactBarrie Urology Group
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceSubmarine pipelineVisibilityAdvectionWind speedMeteorologyFogAtmospheric sciencesTroposphereClimatologyOceanographyGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract As several review papers have concluded, marine fog is imperfectly characterized, and quantitative visibility forecasts are difficult to produce accurately. Some unique measurements have been made offshore Newfoundland and Labrador of the climatology of occurrence and the microphysical characteristics of marine, or open-ocean, fog. Based on measurements made at an offshore installation over 21 years, the percent of time with visibilities less than 0.5 n mi or approximately 1 km (1 n mi ≈ 1.85 km) reaches 45% in July, with a low of about 5% during the winter. The occurrence of fog is mainly due to warm air advection, with the highest frequency occurring with wind directions from over the warm Gulf Stream, and with air temperatures about 2°C warmer than the sea surface temperature. There is no diurnal variation in the frequency of occurrence of fog. The microphysical properties of the fog have been documented in the summer time frame, with over 550 h of in situ measurements made offshore with fog liquid water content greater than 0.005 g m−3. The fog droplet number concentration spectra peaks near 6 μm, with a secondary peak near 25–40 μm, which typically contains most of the liquid water content. The median droplet concentration is approximately 70–100 cm−3. The microphysical spectra have been used to develop a new NWP visibility parameterization scheme, and this scheme is compared with other parameterizations currently in use.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.469
Threshold uncertainty score0.944

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations48
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWeather and ForecastingSame topicMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsFrench-language works237,207