MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3118506728 · doi:10.1175/jtech-d-20-0107.1

Changes in TOA SW Fluxes over Marine Clouds When Estimated via Semiphysical Angular Distribution Models

2021· article· en· W3118506728 on OpenAlexaff
Florian Tornow, Carlos Doménech, Jason N. S. Cole, Nils Madenach, J. Fischer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric aerosols and clouds
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersFreie Universität BerlinLangley Research CenterNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsZenithEnvironmental scienceAtmosphere (unit)Cloud fractionFlux (metallurgy)Atmospheric sciencesShortwaveEffective radiusLiquid water contentSatelliteRadiative fluxDefense Meteorological Satellite ProgramNorthern HemisphereCloud coverRadiative transferCloud topMeteorologyRemote sensingCloud computingPhysicsGeologyAstrophysicsOpticsAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Top-of-atmosphere (TOA) shortwave (SW) angular distribution models (ADMs) approximate—per angular direction of an imagined upward hemisphere—the intensity of sunlight scattered back from a specific Earth–atmosphere scene. ADMs are, thus, critical when converting satellite-borne broadband radiometry into estimated radiative fluxes. This paper applies a set of newly developed ADMs with a more refined scene definition and demonstrates tenable changes in estimated fluxes compared to currently operational ADMs. Newly developed ADMs use a semiphysical framework to consider cloud-top effective radius ( ) and above-cloud water vapor (ACWV), in addition to accounting for surface wind speed and clouds’ phase, fraction, and optical depth. In effect, instantaneous TOA SW fluxes for marine liquid-phase clouds had the largest flux differences (of up to 25 W m −2 ) for lower solar zenith angles and cloud optical depth greater than 10 due to extremes in or ACWV. In regions where clouds had persistently extreme levels of (here mostly for and ) or ACWV, instantaneous fluxes estimated from Aqua , Terra , Meteosat-8 , and Meteosat-9 satellites using the two ADMs differed systematically, resulting in significant deviations in daily mean fluxes (up to ±10 W m −2 ) and monthly mean fluxes (up to ±5 W m −2 ). Flux estimates using newly developed, semiphysical ADMs may contribute to a better understanding of solar fluxes over low-level clouds. It remains to be seen whether aerosol indirect effects are impacted by these updates.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.294
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Atmospheric and Oceanic TechnologySame topicAtmospheric aerosols and cloudsFrench-language works237,207