MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387187939 · doi:10.1175/jtech-d-23-0043.1

Multisensor Agile Adaptive Sampling (MAAS): A Methodology to Collect Radar Observations of Convective Cell Life Cycle

2023· article· en· W4387187939 on OpenAlexaff
Katia Lamer, Pavlos Kollias, Edward Luke, Bernat P. Treserras, Mariko Oue, Brenda Dolan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersScience Mission DirectorateBiological and Environmental ResearchNational Science Foundation
KeywordsRadarComputer scienceRemote sensingAgile software developmentEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyGeologyGeographyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Multisensor Agile Adaptive Sampling (MAAS), a smart sensing framework, was adapted to increase the likelihood of observing the vertical structure (with little to no gaps), spatial variability (at subkilometer scale), and temporal evolution (at ∼2-min resolution) of convective cells. This adaptation of MAAS guided two mechanically scanning C-band radars (CSAPR2 and CHIVO) by automatically analyzing the latest NEXRAD data to identify, characterize, track, and nowcast the location of all convective cells forming in the Houston domain. MAAS used either a list of predetermined rules or real-time user input to select a convective cell to be tracked and sampled by the C-band radars. The CSAPR2 tracking radar was first tasked to collect three sector plan position indicator (PPI) scans toward the selected cell. Edge computer processing of the PPI scans was used to identify additional targets within the selected cell. In less than 2 min, both the CSAPR2 and CHIVO radars were able to collect bundles of three to six range–height indicator (RHI) scans toward different targets of interest within the selected cell. Bundles were successively collected along the path of cell advection for as long as the cell met a predetermined set of criteria. Between 1 June and 30 September 2022 over 315 000 vertical cross-section observations were collected by the C-band radars through ∼1300 unique isolated convective cells, most of which were observed for over 15 min of their life cycle. To the best of our knowledge, this dataset, collected primarily through automatic means, constitutes the largest dataset of its kind.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.462
Threshold uncertainty score0.389

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.197 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations20
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Atmospheric and Oceanic TechnologySame topicMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsFrench-language works237,207