MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412833224 · doi:10.3390/rs17152590

Convective–Stratiform Identification Neural Network (CONSTRAINN) for the WIVERN Mission

2025· article· en· W4412833224 on OpenAlexaff
Federico Mustich, Alessandro Battaglia, Francesco Manconi, Pavlos Kollias, Antonio Parodi

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvectionThunderstormGeologyMeteorologyAtmospheric sciencesEnvironmental sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The WIVERN mission promises to deliver the first global observations of the three-dimensional wind field and the associated cloud and precipitation structure in a wide range of atmospheric phenomena, including isolated thunderstorms, tropical cyclones, mid-latitude frontal systems, and polar lows. A critical element in the development of the mission’s wind products is the differentiation between stratiform and convective regions. Convective regions are defined as those where vertical wind velocities exceed 1 m/s. This work introduces CONSTRAINN, a family of U-Net-based neural network models that utilise all of WIVERN observables—including vertical profiles of reflectivity and Doppler velocity, as well as brightness temperatures—to reconstruct convective wind activity within the Earth’s atmosphere. Results show that the retrieved convective/stratiform masks are well reconstructed, with an equitable threat score exceeding 0.6. Ablation experiments further reveal that Doppler velocity signals are the most informative for the reconstruction task.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 venueRemote SensingSame topicMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsFrench-language works237,207