MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4413132529 · doi:10.5194/ecss2025-275

Polarimetric Radar Signatures of ZDR and KDP in Tornadic Storms over Germany and their Use for Nowcasting

2025· preprint· en· W4413132529 on OpenAlexaff
Erik Brune, Silke Trömel, Lisa Schielicke

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupercellTornadoNowcastingMeteorologySevere weatherStormMesocycloneEnvironmental scienceThunderstormConvective storm detectionGeologyRadarDoppler radarGeographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Germany has one of the highest densities of tornado reports in Europe with several damaging tornadoes observed every year. Although the German Meteorological Service (DWD) has a dedicated warning process in place, it relies on voluntary observers on the ground to confirm tornadoes. Thus, a robust and reliable radar-based detection algorithm for tornadic cells would represent a great improvement of the warning process. Previous studies by Loeffler and Kumjian (2018, Weather&Forecasting, 33(5), 1143-1157) and Loeffler et al. (2020, GRL,47(12), e2020GL088242) showed pathways to distinguish between tornadic and non-tornadic supercells based on signatures of differential reflectivity (ZDR) and specific differential phase (KDP) in polarimetric radar observations. Storm relative winds cause size sorting in precipitation, leading to a higher concentration of larger drops at the forward flank of a supercell and a localized maximum of ZDR. Smaller drops are advected further into the core of the convective cell, causing enhanced values of KDP. In most storms, ZDR and KDP signatures are spatially separated along the storm motion, but in tornadic supercells, and in some tornadic non-supercells, this separation tends to be more perpendicular to the motion vector. This study uses measurements of DWD's polarimetric C-Band radar network to investigate the separation signature in tornadic storms over Germany and its potential for nowcasting. This data is available since 2021 with a radial resolution of 250 m. The analysis includes 16 tornado cases observed in 2021 and 2022, including supercell and non-supercell tornadoes. An clustering algorithm and percentile-defined thresholds are exploited to identify and analyze the separation signature. Results confirm the existence of the signature in both cell types, showing more consistent separations in the supercell cases showing a good potential for nowcasting with lead times of 5 − 20 min. For non-supercell tornadoes, however, the value of the signatures is limited and can at best confirm the occurrence of a tornado. Results also show differing track characteristics of clusters with enhanced ZDR and KDP for both cell types. In supercells, the clusters tend to deviate less around the linear direction of storm motion, which may be linked to the degree of organization of the storm. An extended and revised version of the algorithm is assumed to significantly improve the warning process for tornadoes in Germany.

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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations→French-language works237,207→