MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994734791 · doi:10.1029/2009jd013274

Evolution of the stratospheric aerosol enhancement following the eruptions of Okmok and Kasatochi: Odin‐OSIRIS measurements

2010· article· en· W1994734791 on OpenAlexafffund
Adam Bourassa, D. A. Degenstein, B. J. Elash, E. J. Llewellyn

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsStratosphereAerosolAtmospheric sciencesMiddle latitudesVolcanoOsirisEnvironmental scienceAltitude (triangle)LatitudeOptical depthExtinction (optical mineralogy)Zonal and meridionalVulcanian eruptionGeologyClimatologyMeteorologyPhysicsMineralogyGeodesy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Limb‐scattered sunlight measurements made by the OSIRIS instrument on the Odin spacecraft during the months following the eruptions of Mount Okmok and Kasatochi volcanos in 2008 are used to retrieve vertical profiles of the stratospheric aerosol extinction. These measurements reveal the evolution of the formation, transport, and decay of the stratospheric aerosol cloud that forms as a result of the volcanic eruptions. The maximum vertical optical depth of the stratospheric aerosol, measured by OSIRIS at 750 nm, occurs at midlatitude to high latitude 4 to 6 weeks after the Kasatochi eruption and is approximately a factor of 2 above the background level. Significant meridional transport in the lower stratosphere is evident in the observations, with measurable enhancement extending up to 21 km altitude and reaching tropical latitudes. Seven months following the eruption of Kasatochi, the stratospheric aerosol optical depth is very near the background level measured before the eruptions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.166
Threshold uncertainty score0.600

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations69
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicAtmospheric Ozone and ClimateFrench-language works237,207