MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022114956 · doi:10.1139/v04-069

An intercomparison of measured pressure-broadening and pressure-shifting parameters of water vapor

2004· article· en· W2022114956 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Robert R. Gamache, Jean-Michel Hartmann

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSpectroscopy and Laser Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsRotational–vibrational spectroscopyChemistryWater vaporLine (geometry)Atmosphere (unit)Work (physics)Vapor pressureAbsorption (acoustics)Computational physicsMeteorologyAtomic physicsThermodynamicsOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present work is an intercomparison of experimental results on the pressure broadening and pressure shifting of water vapor absorption lines. The work focuses on application to the Earth's atmosphere; hence measurements of nitrogen, oxygen, air, and H2O as the buffer, or perturbing gas, were considered. The literature was searched and over 100 papers found. The data, measured half-widths, their temperature dependence, and the line shifts, were taken and databases created for each perturbing gas. The databases were reordered, grouping data for rovibrational transitions, and intercomparisons of the measurements made. Trends in the data, relationships between the data sets, and dependences on temperature and quantum numbers were investigated. The data were averaged and an estimated uncertainty determined. The averaged data sets are evaluated with respect to the need of the spectroscopic and remote sensing communities. Based on these studies, recommendations for new measurements are made.Key words: water vapor, half-widths, line shifts, temperature dependence of half-width.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.240
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 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

Citations72
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicSpectroscopy and Laser ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207