MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055411822 · doi:10.3808/jei.200700097

Evaluating Satellite-Based Measurements for Mapping Air Quality in Ontario, Canada

2007· article· en· W2055411822 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jinfeng Tian

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Informatics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersGoddard Space Flight CenterMinistry of EnvironmentNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsSatelliteEnvironmental scienceModerate-resolution imaging spectroradiometerSpectroradiometerAir quality indexRemote sensingMeteorologyOzoneAerosolAtmosphere (unit)Atmospheric sciencesGeographyGeologyReflectivity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a study of examining the correlation between the satellite observations and the ground-based measurements of air quality in Ontario, Canada. Two atmospheric parameters-total ozone burden (TOB), and aerosol optical depth (AOD) data-were extracted from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) atmosphere data products. TOB and AOD were then compared with the coincident ground-based ozone concentration (GOC) and fine particular matter (PM2.5) in summer and winter seasons, respectively. The comparison results showed that AOD was most strongly related with coincident hourly PM2.5 in summer, while TOB and coincident hourly GOC have shown their fairly strong correlation in winter. The correlation between MODIS measurement and ground monitoring data in summer seems independent from those in winter. This is the first study to demonstrate that the correlation between the satellite measurement and ground monitoring data varied in different seasons. The air quality distribution obtained from satellite images has a much better correspondence with the regional morphology than those interpolated from ground 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations13
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental InformaticsSame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207