Estimating regional carbon exchange in New England and Quebec by combining atmospheric, ground-based and satellite data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We derive regional-scale (∼104 km2) CO2 flux estimates for summer 2004 in the northeast United States and southern Quebec by assimilating extensive data into a receptor-oriented model-data fusion framework. Surface fluxes are specified using the Vegetation Photosynthesis and Respiration Model (VPRM), a simple, readily optimized biosphere model driven by satellite data, AmeriFlux eddy covariance measurements and meteorological fields. The surface flux model is coupled to a Lagrangian atmospheric adjoint model, the Stochastic Time-Inverted Lagrangian Transport Model (STILT) that links point observations to upwind sources with high spatiotemporal resolution. Analysis of CO2 concentration data from the NOAA-ESRL tall tower at Argyle, ME and from extensive aircraft surveys, shows that the STILT–VPRM framework successfully links model flux fields to regionally representative atmospheric CO2 data, providing a bridge between ‘bottom-up’ and ‘top-down’ methods for estimating regional CO2 budgets on timescales from hourly to monthly. The surface flux model, with initial calibration to eddy covariance data, produces an excellent a priori condition for inversion studies constrained by atmospheric concentration data. Exploratory optimization studies show that data from several sites in a region are needed to constrain model parameters for all major vegetation types, because the atmosphere commingles the influence of regional vegetation types, and even high-resolution meteorological analysis cannot disentangle the associated contributions. Airborne data are critical to help define uncertainty within the optimization framework, showing for example, that in summertime CO2 concentration at Argyle (107 m) is ∼0.6 ppm lower than the mean in the planetary boundary layer.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".