Comparison of Balloonsonde and Remote Sensing Atmospheric Measurements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As part of its aircraft icing research program, the NASA Glenn Research Center is conducting a program to develop technologies for the remote sensing of atmospheric conditions. A suite of instruments, currently ground-based, are used to identify a region of supercooled liquid water which is labeled as hazardous if its liquid water content is sufficiently high. During the recently completed Alliance Icing Research Study (AIRS II), these instruments were deployed in conjunction with those of other U.S. and Canadian researchers at the Mirabel Airport near Montreal. As part of the study, balloonsondes were employed to provide in-situ measurement of the atmospheric conditions that were being concurrently remotely sensed. Balloonsonde launches occurred daily at 1200 GMT to provide AIRS forecasters with local data and additionally when research aircraft were present in the airspace. In this paper, we compare the processed data from the NASA remote sensing instruments, which included an X-band radar, lidar and two radiometers, to the data gathered from the 70 soundings conducted while the NASA instruments were active. Among the parameters compared are cloud upper and lower boundaries, temperature and humidity profiles and freezing levels.
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) | 0.001 | 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".