As part of work on a class project @dpequeen and @aalynnttu have implemented the three moist lapse rate implementations in the AMS glossary. See their narrative describing results and uncertainties in the notebook at their repository. For the reversible processes, the AMS Glossary is unclear about what to assume for liquid water content at each level, as also noted in #433. Section 4.7 in Emanuel gives an expression for the differential change in mixing ratio with height (pressure). Given that expression, and assuming a starting parcel condition at the LCL, it should be possible to predict an exact amount of water condensed at any height above the just-saturated point. The calculation already uses an ODE solver, so I think the infrastructure is already there to do this additional step. Another surprising result was that the “compromise” moist adiabatic lapse rate is not between the pseudo adiabatic and reversible moist adiabatic curves as the AMS glossary text would seemingly imply. Regardless, the work here should be a helpful, concrete advancement of the things that need to be resolved to close this issue.