MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392604104 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu24-11598

Ice production in northern hemisphere cold air-outbreak clouds: two contrasting aircraft campaigns

2024· preprint· en· W4392604104 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Benjamin J. Murray

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIcing and De-icing Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNorthern HemisphereOutbreakGeographyClimatologyEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyAtmospheric sciencesGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cold-air outbreaks (CAOs) are common high-impact weather events that produce extensive boundary layer clouds that have a substantial influence on our planet’s climate. These clouds are often supercooled and therefore their properties are susceptible to the formation of ice.  The amount of ice in these clouds has been identified as being particularly important for defining the magnitude of the cloud-climate feedback and climate sensitivity.To address ice production in northern hemisphere CAOs we conducted two contrasting aircraft campaigns in 2022.  One campaign (ACAO, 11 flights) was in March in the Norwegian and Barents Sea where cold air flowed from the ice-covered Arctic Ocean. The other (M-Phase, 12 flights) was in October-November and focused on the Labrador Sea with air coming from the Arctic Archipelago. In both campaigns, we used similar instruments on the FAAM BAe-146 research aircraft designed to probe the aerosol properties, cloud microphysics and atmospheric thermodynamics of the CAO events.  Flight sorties were designed to study aerosol-cloud interactions as the CAO developed through the stratus and into the cumulus regime.We found that INP concentrations in these Northern Hemisphere CAOs were orders of magnitude greater than CAO events over the Southern Ocean.  The springtime ACAO cases had systematically greater INP (and aerosol) concentrations than the autumnal Labrador Sea M-Phase cases. The presence of substantial amounts of mineral dust in the springtime Arctic, despite all local sources being covered in ice and snow, implies a reservoir of old INPs and aerosol in the springtime Arctic that originated from the low latitudes. This is supported by our global aerosol model. Primary ice production by INPs is shown to define the ice concentrations in the stratus regime in many cases, but in the cumulus regime there are pockets of very high ice concentrations that are indicative of secondary ice production.Our modelling work has demonstrated that INPs are key to defining the stratus to cumulus transition and the cases are providing an excellent test for the high-resolution regional modelling with the Met Office Unified Model.  We are also using ACAO cases to study how INPs interact with clouds in CAOs, where warm temperature INPs are preferentially lost through nucleation scavenging. Furthermore, we envisage that the data from these campaigns will provide a valuable resource for model development, hypothesis testing and contrasting with other CAO campaigns in other places and times. Given the stark contrast of primary ice production in CAO clouds in different locations and times around the globe, we conclude that the primary production of ice in model CAO clouds should be linked to the aerosol properties and knowledge of the local INP population to reduce uncertainty in cloud feedback and climate sensitivity.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.732
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.218 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIcing and De-icing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207