Visibility and Ceiling Nowcasting Using Artificial Intelligence Techniques for Aviation Applications
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work presents a novel approach for simulating visibility (Vis) and ceiling base height (Hc) in up to 1 h using several machine learning (ML) algorithms. Ten years of meteorological data at 15 min intervals for Santos Dumont airport (SDA), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil were used in the ML method training and testing process. In the investigation, several categorical and regressive algorithms were trained and tested, and the results were verified with observations. The forecast results reveal that the categorical methods produced satisfactory results only up to 15 min for visibility prediction with the probability of detection greater than 85%. On the other hand, the regressive methods were found to be more capable of generating an accurate prediction of Vis and Hc compared to categorical method up to 60 min. The forecast evaluation metrics for Vis and Hc had correlation coefficients of 0.99 ± 0.00 and 0.96 ± 0.00, with mean absolute errors of 324 ± 77 m, and 167 ± 21 m, respectively. Results suggested that ML methods can improve the prediction of Vis and Hc up to 1 h when accurate observations are used for the 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.
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) | 0.000 | 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 it