Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tornados are a major hazard and an ever-present threat around the world with the potential to cause wide scale loss of life and damage to infrastructure. There have been many attempts to model tornados by developing simulation techniques that allow a vortex to be generated for the purposes of understanding the characteristics of tornado maintenance and intensity. Traditionally, these models comprise an analysis of the wind field measurement data using Doppler radar collection, derivation of analytical tornado systems such as the Rankine vortex model, experimental modelling in a laboratory vortex chamber, or the more recent numerical simulation techniques. In the realm of wind engineering, these models tend to focus on the tornado vortex absent a parent storm and, as such, rely on artificial boundary conditions that lead to uniform, axially symmetric rotation of wind about a vertical axis centred in the model domain. This project aims to provide a quantitative assessment of the discrepancy between the velocities of wind-fields generated by the previous models with those of a physically realistic tornado spawned from a supercell in a meteorological numerical cloud model simulation at full-scale and able to freely form and dissipate in a large, yet well-resolved, domain. Further analysis will be performed to understand how the in-flow of wind at the simulation domain boundaries affects the mechanics of the simulated tornado and to determine the ideal ratio of the tornado radius to the size of its domain. Thus far, a novel method has been proposed to be used in tracking the precise centre of the tornado, upon which to base all subsequent analyses, and a comparison of the tangential velocity profiles of prior models have been shown to match that of the tornados analyzed in this work (when circumferentiallyaveraged). The non-averaged velocities of the tornado data analyzed here demonstrate high velocities in the wind-field in excess of 50% of the peak in the averaged profile, extending far from the core of the tornado. These findings indicate the need to incorporate the maximum tangential velocities in the analysis of tornado profiles and the potential dangers entailed in assuming the tornado does not freely form and move within its simulation domain and simply rotates symmetrically about a fixed, vertical axis. Finally, these findings outline to what extent current models of tornados underestimate their destructive potential and how they could be improved in future to provide superior results for engineering analysis.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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; 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".