Global temperature estimates in the troposphere and stratosphere: a validation study of COSMIC/FORMOSAT-3 measurements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. This paper mainly focuses on the validation of temperature estimates derived with the newly launched Constellation Observing System for Meteorology Ionosphere and Climate (COSMIC)/Formosa Satellite 3 (FORMOSAT-3) system. The analysis is based on the radio occultation (RO) data samples collected during the first year observation from April 2006 to April 2007. For the validation, we have used the operational stratospheric analyses including the National Centers for Environmental Prediction - Reanalysis (NCEP), the Japanese 25-year Reanalysis (JRA-25), and the United Kingdom Met Office (MetO) data sets. Comparisons done in different formats reveal good agreement between the COSMIC and reanalysis outputs. Spatially, the largest deviations are noted in the polar latitudes, and height-wise, the tropical tropopause region noted the maximum differences (2–4 K). We found that among the three reanalysis data sets the NCEP data sets have the best resemblance with the COSMIC measurements.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".