MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407260426 · doi:10.1016/j.ast.2025.110038

In-flight measurements of lightning locations using an aircraft-mounted lightning mapper

2025· article· en· W4407260426 on OpenAlexaff
Zachary R. Milani, Leonid Nichman, Edgar Matida, Liam Fleury, Mengistu Wolde, Eric C. Bruning, Greg M. McFarquhar, Pavlos Kollias

Bibliographic record

VenueAerospace Science and Technology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLightning and Electromagnetic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityNational Research Council Canada
FundersBiological and Environmental ResearchDivision of Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences
KeywordsLightning (connector)Lightning strikeMeteorologyUpper-atmospheric lightningRemote sensingAerospace engineeringAeronauticsGeodesyEnvironmental scienceEngineeringGeologyPhysicsThunderstorm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Real-time measurements of lightning locations can improve flight safety by providing aircraft operators with valuable information about nearby weather conditions. Lightning warnings can be especially valuable when piloting aircraft that are more susceptible to a direct strike such as electric aircraft, hydrogen-powered aircraft, and even UAVs with composite skins. At best, weather updates are broadcast from weather services every 2.5 to 5 mins, but it's not uncommon for an intermittent connection to cause service stability issues. Therefore, an aircraft-mounted lightning mapper might be the most practical source of real-time lightning information for pilots. This work investigates the in-flight performance of the aircraft-mounted Stormscope Weather Mapping System (WX-500 Series 2) through comparisons to the Houston Lightning Mapping Array, National Lightning Detection Network, and the GOES - Geostationary Lightning Mapper. Measurements from two thunderstorms near Houston, TX, yielded WX-500 detection efficiencies of 33 % and 42 % for intracloud flashes, 75 % and 64 % for cloud to ground flashes, and 53 % and 79 % for total flashes. The WX-500 bearing measurement was accurate to within ±14° (σ), which improved to ±4° when integration time was increased from 2 to 30 s and clear outliers were ignored. The WX-500 range measurement was overestimated by an average of +74 km (±50 km) when the average true flash distance was 94 km. The WX-500 accurately depicted the boundary of lightning activity at an integration time of 1 min which is sufficient for the circumnavigation of thunderstorms.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAerospace Science and TechnologySame topicLightning and Electromagnetic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207