High‐Resolution Large‐Eddy Simulations of Flow in the Complex Terrain of the Canadian Rockies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Improving the calculation of land‐atmosphere fluxes of heat and water vapor in mountain terrain requires better resolution of thermally driven diurnal winds (i.e., valley, slope winds) due to differential heating by terrain and radiative fluxes. In this study, the Weather Research and Forecasting model is used to simulate flow in large‐eddy simulation (LES) mode over the complex terrain of the Fortress Mountain and Marmot Creek research basins, Kananaskis Valley, Canadian Rockies, Alberta in mid‐summer. The model was used to examine the temporal and spatial evolution of local winds and near‐surface boundary layer processes with variability in topography and elevation. Numerically resolving complex terrain wind flow effects require smaller grid cell size. However, the use of terrain‐following coordinates in most numerical weather prediction models results in large numerical errors when flow over steep terrain is simulated. These errors propagate through the domain and can result in numerical instability. To avoid this issue when simulating flow over steep terrain a local smoothing approach was used, where smoothing is applied only where slope exceeds some predetermined threshold. LES results from local smoothing were compared with a mesoscale model and LES with global smoothing. Simulations are evaluated using sounding data and meteorological stations. The differences in flow patterns and reversals in two mountain basins suggest that valley geometry and volume is relevant to the break up of inversion layers, removal of cold‐air pools, and strength of thermally driven winds.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".