MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401667758 · doi:10.1002/qj.4818

Evaluation of near‐surface and boundary‐layer meteorological conditions that support cold‐fog formation using Cold Fog Amongst Complex Terrain field campaign observations

2024· article· en· W4401667758 on OpenAlexaff
Rebecca Lynn Beal, Zhaoxia Pu, Eric R. Pardyjak, Sebastian W. Hoch, Ismail Gültepe

Bibliographic record

VenueQuarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersNational Science Foundation of Sri Lanka
KeywordsTerrainMeteorologyBoundary layerFogCold winterEnvironmental scienceField (mathematics)Atmospheric sciencesGeologyGeographyAerospace engineeringEngineeringCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Cold fog refers to a type of fog that forms when the temperature is below 0°C. It can be composed of liquid, ice, and mixed‐phase fog particles. Cold fog happens frequently over mountainous terrain in the cold season, but it is difficult to predict. Using observations from the Cold Fog Amongst Complex Terrain (CFACT) field campaign conducted in Heber Valley, Utah, in the western United States during January and February of 2022, this study investigates the meteorological conditions in the surface and boundary layers that support the formation of wintertime ephemeral cold fog in a local area of small‐scale mountain valleys. It is found that fog formation is susceptible to subtleties in forcing conditions and is supported by several factors: (1) established high pressure over the Great Basin with associated local clear skies, calm winds, and a stable boundary layer; (2) near‐surface inversion with saturation near the surface and strong moisture gradient in the boundary layer; (3) warm (above‐freezing) daytime air temperature with a large diurnal range, accompanied with warm soil temperatures during the daytime; (4) a period of increased turbulence kinetic energy (above 0.5 m 2 ·s −2 ), followed by calm conditions throughout the fog's duration; and (5) supersaturation with respect to ice. Then, the field observations and identified supporting factors for fog formation were utilized to evaluate high‐resolution (˜400 m horizontal grid spacing) Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model simulations. Results show that the WRF model accurately simulates the mesoscale conditions facilitating cold‐fog formation but misses some critical surface and atmospheric boundary conditions. The overall results from this paper indicate that these identified factors that support fog formation are vital to accurately forecasting cold‐fog events. At the same time, they are also critical fields for the NWP model validation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological SocietySame topicMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsFrench-language works237,207