MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4255590352 · doi:10.5194/acp-2021-101

Impact of high and low vorticity turbulence on cloud environmentmixing and cloud microphysics processes

2021· preprint· en· W4255590352 on OpenAlexafffund
Man‐Kong Yau, Sudarsan Bera, Suryachadra A. Rao

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicParticle Dynamics in Fluid Flows
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaIndian Institute of Technology MadrasMinistry of Earth Sciences
KeywordsVorticityTurbulenceMixing (physics)Entrainment (biomusicology)MechanicsCloud physicsCondensationMeteorologyTurbulence kinetic energyAtmospheric sciencesPhysicsEnvironmental scienceVortexCloud computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Turbulent mixing of dry air affects evolution of cloud droplet size spectrum through various mechanisms. In a turbulent cloud, high and low vorticity regions coexist and inertial clustering of cloud droplets can occur in a low vorticity region. The non-uniformity in spatial distribution of size and number of droplets, variable vertical velocity in vortical turbulent structures, and dilution by entrainment/mixing may result in spatial supersaturation variability, which affects the evolution of the cloud droplet size spectrum by condensation and evaporation processes. To untangle the processes involved in mixing phenomena, a direct numerical simulation (DNS) of turbulent-mixing followed by droplet evaporation/condensation in a submeter-cubed-sized domain with a large number of droplets is performed in this study. Analysis focused on the thermodynamic and microphysical characteristics of the droplets and flow in high and low vorticity regions. The impact of vorticity production in turbulent flows on mixing and cloud microphysics is illustrated.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.213 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicParticle Dynamics in Fluid FlowsFrench-language works237,207