Toronto Water Vapor Lidar Inter-Comparison Campaign
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study presents comparisons between vertical water vapor profile measurements from a Raman lidar and a new pre-production broadband differential absorption lidar (DIAL). Vaisala’s novel DIAL system operates autonomously outdoors and measures the vertical profile of water vapor within the boundary layer 24 h a day during all weather conditions. Eight nights of measurements in June and July 2018 were used for the Toronto water vapor lidar inter-comparison field campaign. Both lidars provided reliable atmospheric backscatter and water vapor profile measurements. Comparisons were performed during night-time observations only, when the York Raman lidar could measure the water vapor profile. The purpose was to validate the water vapor profile measurements retrieved by the new DIAL system. The results indicate good agreement between the two lidars, with a mean difference (DIAL–Raman) of 0.17 ± 0.14 g/kg. There were two main causes for differences in their measurements: horizontal displacement between the two lidar sites (3.2 km) and vertical gradients in the water vapor profile. A case study analyzed during the campaign demonstrates the ability for both lidars to measure sudden changes and large gradients in the water vapor’s vertical structure due to a passing frontal system. These results provide an initial validation of the DIAL’s measurements and its ability to be implemented as part of an operational program.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".