Sizing ice hydrometeor populations using dual-wavelength radar ratio
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Dual-wavelength (3.2 and 0.32 cm, i.e., X- and W- radar bands) radar ratio (DWR) measurements in ice clouds and precipitation using the Canada’s National Research Council Institute for Aerospace Research airborne radar are compared to closely collocated particle microphysical in situ sampling data in order to develop relations between DWR and characteristic hydrometeor size. This study uses the radar and in situ data sets collected during the In-Cloud ICing and Large-drop Experiment (ICICLE) campaign. Since atmospheric particle scattering at X-band is predominately in the Rayleigh regime and the W-band frequency is the highest frequency usually used for hydrometeor remote sensing, the X-W-band combination provides relatively strong dual-wavelength reflectivity difference. This study considers radar and in situ measurements conducted in relatively homogeneous cloud and precipitation conditions. Measurements show that under these conditions, the difference between the X-band radar reflectivities observed with vertical and horizontal pointing of the radar beam are generally small and often negligible. However, W-band band reflectivities at vertical beam pointing are, on average, larger than those for horizontal beam pointing by about 4 dB, which is a non-Rayleigh scattering effect from oriented non-spherical particles. A horizontal beam DWR – mean volume particle size, Dv, relation provides robust estimates of this characteristic size for populations of particles with different habits. Uncertainties of Dv retrievals using DWR are around 0.6 mm when Dv is greater than approximately 1 mm. Size estimates using vertical radar beam DWRs have larger uncertainties due to smaller dual-wavelength signals and stronger influences of hydrometeor habits and orientations at this geometry of beam pointing. Mean relationships among different characteristic sizes describing the entire particle size distribution (PSD) such as Dv, and other characteristic sizes used in different applications (e.g., the mean, effective, and median sizes) are derived, so the results of this study can be used for estimating different PSD characteristic sizes.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".