Intercomparisons of trace gases profiles from the Odin/SMR and Aura/MLS limb sounders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the intercomparison of O3, HNO3, ClO, N2O and CO profiles measured by the two spaceborne microwave instruments MLS (Microwave Limb Sounder) and SMR (Submillimetre Radiometer) on board the Aura and Odin satellites, respectively. We compared version 1.5 level 2 data from MLS with level 2 data produced by the French data processor version 222 and 225 and by the Swedish data processor version 2.0 for several days in September 2004 and in March 2005. For the five gases studied, an overall good agreement is found between both instruments. Most of the observed discrepancies between SMR and MLS are consistent with results from other intercomparison studies involving MLS or SMR. O3 profiles retrieved from the SMR 501.8 GHz band are noisier than MLS profiles but mean biases between both instruments do not exceed 10%. SMR HNO3 profiles are biased low relative to MLS's by ∼30% above the profile peak. In the lower stratosphere, MLS ClO profiles are biased low by up to 0.3 ppbv relative to coincident SMR profiles, except in the Southern Hemisphere polar vortex in the presence of chlorine activation. N2O profiles from both instruments are in very good agreement with mean biases not exceeding 15%. Finally, the intercomparison between SMR and MLS CO profiles has shown a good agreement from the middle stratosphere to the middle mesosphere in spite of strong oscillations in the MLS profiles. In the upper mesosphere, MLS CO concentrations are biased high relative to SMR while negative values in the MLS retrievals are responsible for a negative bias in the tropics around 30 hPa.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".