MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999989774 · doi:10.1029/2005gl024926

Comparisons of remote sensing retrievals and in situ measurements of aerosol fine mode fraction during ACE‐Asia

2006· article· en· W1999989774 on OpenAlexaff
Santiago Gassó, N. T. O’Neill

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric aerosols and clouds
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersUniversity of Maryland, Baltimore CountyNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsAerosolEnvironmental scienceIn situRemote sensingMode (computer interface)Atmospheric sciencesRange (aeronautics)MeteorologyMaterials scienceGeologyPhysicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present sunphotometer‐retrieved and in situ fine mode fractions (FMF) measured onboard the same aircraft during the ACE‐Asia experiment. Comparisons indicate that the latter can be used to identify whether the aerosol under observation is dominated by a mixture of modes or a single mode. Differences between retrieved and in situ FMF range from 5–20%. When profiles contained multiple layers of aerosols, the retrieved and measured FMF were segregated by layers. The comparison of layered and total FMF from the same profile indicates that columnar values are intermediate to those derived from layers. As a result, a remotely sensed FMF cannot be used to distinguish whether the aerosol under observation is composed of layers each with distinctive modal features or all layers with the same modal features. Thus, the use of FMF in multiple layer environments does not provide unique information on the aerosol under observation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.427
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations17
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicAtmospheric aerosols and cloudsFrench-language works237,207