MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411785593 · doi:10.1029/2025gl114941

Causal Directions Matter: How Environmental Factors Drive Convective Cloud Detrainment Heights

2025· article· en· W4411785593 on OpenAlexaff
Dié Wang, Simon H. Lee, Tao Zhang, Christian Philipp Lackner, Daniel J. Kirshbaum, Michael Jensen

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersWorkforce Development for Teachers and ScientistsU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceCloud computingAtmospheric sciencesConvectionMeteorologyPhysicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study investigates how environmental factors influence the level of maximum detrainment (LMD) in deep convective clouds. Through a novel application of the Linear Non‐Gaussian Acyclic Model (LiNGAM), we discover causal structures between environmental variables and LMD, observed at six tropical sites operated by the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) user facility. LiNGAM effectively identifies causal directions among variables of interest, revealing robust relationships such as those among the lifting condensation level (LCL), level of free convection (LFC), and convective inhibition (CIN), aligning with prior knowledge. Relative humidity is shown to directly influence LMD; however, this relationship exhibits strong nonlinearity and becomes difficult to detect when the contrast between oceanic and continental environments is excluded from the analysis. This study highlights the importance of establishing causal relationships before performing statistical inference.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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