MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009234672 · doi:10.1029/2006jd007234

Effects of source temporal resolution on transport simulations of boreal fire emissions

2007· article· en· W2009234672 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
E. J. Hyer, Eric S. Kasischke, D. J. Allen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceBorealTroposphereAtmospheric sciencesTaigaSatelliteRadiometerTemporal resolutionMeteorologySampling (signal processing)ClimatologyRemote sensingGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The quality of temporal information from daily burned area inputs was evaluated using a transport and chemistry experiment. Carbon monoxide emissions from boreal forest fires were estimated using burned area inputs with daily resolution. Averaging of emissions data to create 30‐day aggregate data reduced the variance by 80%, indicating a substantial loss of information. Data from Russia, Canada, and Alaska were tested for periodicity to uncover systematic gaps in daily data. Some evidence of periodicity was found in data from Alaska, where temporal information came from fire mapping by the Alaskan Fire Service. Autocorrelation decayed rapidly and nearly monotonically for Canada and Russia, where temporal information came from Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) satellite observations. Daily data as well as 7‐day and 30‐day aggregates were used as input to the University of Maryland Atmospheric Chemistry and Transport Model, and output was compared with CO observations from the Cooperative Air Sampling Network (CASN); continuous measurements from Mace Head, Ireland; and total column CO retrievals from the Measurement of Pollution in the Troposphere (MOPITT) instrument. CASN flask measurements showed no sensitivity to high‐frequency variability in the source, indicating the effectiveness of the filtering protocol at ensuring only well‐mixed air masses are sampled in this data set. Differences between daily and 7‐day simulations were too small for quantitative comparison in any of the data. For cases where the differences were substantial, simulations using daily and 7‐day average sources agreed better with observations than 30‐day average sources.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.152

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations29
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207