MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W844003668

Comparison of Balloonsonde and Remote Sensing Atmospheric Measurements

2006· article· en· W844003668 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
D.J. Brinker, Andrew Reehorst, Jack W Power

Bibliographic record

Venue11th Conference on Aviation, Range, and Aerospace and the 22nd Conference on Severe Local Storms · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIcing and De-icing Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRemote sensingIcingEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyRadarLidarSuiteCirrusAtmospheric Infrared SounderAtmospheric researchWater vaporGeographyEngineeringAerospace engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.219 · 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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue11th Conference on Aviation, Range, and Aerospace and the 22nd Conference on Severe Local StormsSame topicIcing and De-icing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207