C-FOG: Life of Coastal Fog
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract C-FOG is a comprehensive bi-national project dealing with the formation, persistence, and dissipation (life cycle) of fog in coastal areas (coastal fog) controlled by land, marine, and atmospheric processes. Given its inherent complexity, coastal-fog literature has mainly focused on case studies, and there is a continuing need for research that integrates across processes (e.g., air–sea–land interactions, environmental flow, aerosol transport, and chemistry), dynamics (two-phase flow and turbulence), microphysics (nucleation, droplet characterization), and thermodynamics (heat transfer and phase changes) through field observations and modeling. Central to C-FOG was a field campaign in eastern Canada from 1 September to 8 October 2018, covering four land sites in Newfoundland and Nova Scotia and an adjacent coastal strip transected by the Research Vessel Hugh R. Sharp. An array of in situ, path-integrating, and remote sensing instruments gathered data across a swath of space–time scales relevant to fog life cycle. Satellite and reanalysis products, routine meteorological observations, numerical weather prediction model (WRF and COAMPS) outputs, large-eddy simulations, and phenomenological modeling underpin the interpretation of field observations in a multiscale and multiplatform framework that helps identify and remedy numerical model deficiencies. An overview of the C-FOG field campaign and some preliminary analysis/findings are presented in this paper.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".