Comparison between the Impinging Jet Model and Experimental Stationary Downbursts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The phenomenon of downdraft from thunderstorm cloud which after the touch-down spreads radially is well-known in both the meteorological and the wind-engineering community and has been under active investigation by a lot of authors since more than 50 years. In this paper, a simple impinging jet simulation has been compared with experimental downbursts in order to understand to which extent this approach can be considered realistic for practical applications. \nWind tunnel experiments have been carried out at the University of Western Ontario’s WindEEE Dome Research Institute. The radial velocity was measured at various locations and the obtained profiles have been used as a reference for the comparison with the impinging jet, simulated by a steady-state Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) approach. As downbursts are highly transient phenomena, the impinging jet solution has been compared with the measured velocity profiles, which typically show three parts, i.e. ramp-up, plateau and dissipation, aiming to identify which part (if any) of the downburst lifecycle can be adequatelly represented by the steady-state numerical simulation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".