MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394855019 · doi:10.1029/2024gl108490

Secondary Ice Production Improves Simulations of Freezing Rain

2024· article· en· W4394855019 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Mélissa Cholette, Jason A. Milbrandt, Hugh Morrison, Sabrina Kirk, L. Lalonde

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalPolytechnique MontréalEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
KeywordsPrecipitationEnvironmental scienceFreezing rainHard rimeWinter stormSnowStormClimatologyPrecipitation typesGraupelAtmospheric sciencesMeteorologyGeologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Weather forecasts and climate projections of precipitation phase and type in winter storms are challenging due to the complicated underlying microphysical and dynamical processes. In the Canadian numerical weather prediction model, explicit freezing rain (FR) at the surface is often overestimated during the winter season for situations in which snow is observed. For a case study simulated using this model with the Predicted Particle Properties (P3) microphysics scheme, the secondary ice production (SIP) process has a major impact on the surface precipitation type. Parameterized SIP substantially reduces FR due to increased collection of supercooled drops with ice particles formed by rime splintering. Hindcast simulations of 40 winter cases show that these results are systematic, and the decreased frequency of FR leads to improved forecast skill relative to observations. Thus, accounting for SIP in the model is critical for accurately simulating precipitation types.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.698
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsFrench-language works237,207