Blowing Snow at McMurdo Station, Antarctica During the AWARE Field Campaign: Surface and Ceilometer Observations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Blowing snow (BLSN) is an impactful process in cold climates, affecting regional thermodynamics, radiation properties, and the surface mass balance of snow. Though it has significant climatic impacts, the process is still poorly understood and not widely included in weather and climate models. In 2016, the AWARE Field Campaign saw the deployment of a large suite of in situ and remote sensing instruments to McMurdo Station, Antarctica allowing for investigation of BLSN. A ceilometer‐based BLSN detection algorithm used elsewhere in Antarctica is applied to data from AWARE, yielding a BLSN frequency of 14.1% compared to 8.2% as detected by human observers. To increase confidence in detections, the algorithm is updated to have shorter temporal averaging and to include a variety of meteorological thresholds to limit false detections due to fog. Efforts to incorporate a laser disdrometer into the algorithm were unsuccessful. An unphysical dependence of particle size distributions on wind speed is found suggesting observations are problematic at wind speeds greater than 10 m s−1. The revised algorithm detected a BLSN frequency of 7.4%, increasing agreement with human observations and confidence that the process is actively occurring at the observation site. These observations are put into context of a climatology of human observations of BLSN at McMurdo station from 2002–2018. An annual average of 8.0%–14.0% is estimated, with a total annual range of 3.4%–21.3%. Regardless of whether BLSN is observed by humans or instrument, the majority of cases at this location are associated with ongoing precipitation.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".