Column Relative Humidity and Primary Condensation Rate as Two Useful Supplements to Atmospheric River Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Landfalling atmospheric rivers (ARs) frequently trigger heavy and sometimes prolonged precipitation, especially in regions with favored orographic enhancement. The presence and strength of ARs are often described using the integrated water vapor (IWV) and the integrated vapor transport (IVT). However, the associated precipitation is not directly correlated with these two variables. Instead, the intensity of precipitation is mainly determined by the net convergence of moisture flux and the initial degree of saturation of the air column. In this study, a simple algorithm is proposed for estimating the heavy precipitation attributable to the IVT convergence. Bearing a strong resemblance to the Kuo‐Anthes parameterization scheme for cumulus convection, the proposed algorithm calculates the large‐scale primary condensation rate (PCR) as a proportion of the IVT convergence, with a reduction to account for the general moistening in the atmosphere. The amount of reduction is determined by the column relative humidity (CRH), which is defined as the ratio of IWV to its saturation counterpart. Our analysis indicates that the diagnosable PCR compares well to the forecast precipitation rate given by a numerical weather prediction model. It is also shown that the PCR in an air column with CRH 0.50 is negligibly small. The usefulness of CRH and PCR as two complements to standard AR analysis is illustrated in three case studies. The potential application of PCR to storm classification is also explored.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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".