MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073031227 · doi:10.1029/2000jd900237

Airborne intercomparison of vacuum ultraviolet fluorescence and tunable diode laser absorption measurements of tropospheric carbon monoxide

2000· article· en· W2073031227 on OpenAlexaff
J. S. Holloway, R. Jakoubek, D. D. Parrish, Christoph Gerbig, A. Volz‐Thomas, S. Schmitgen, Alan Fried, B. Wert, Bruce Henry, J. R. Drummond

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
KeywordsCalibrationEnvironmental scienceTunable diode laser absorption spectroscopyTroposphereRemote sensingInstrumentation (computer programming)SatelliteAbsorption (acoustics)LaserAtmospheric sciencesTunable laserOpticsPhysicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the fall 1997 North Atlantic Regional Experiment (NARE 97), two separate intercomparisons of aircraft‐based carbon monoxide measurement instrumentation were conducted. On September 2, CO measurements were simultaneously made aboard the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) WP‐3 by vacuum ultraviolet (VUV) fluorescence and by tunable diode laser absorption spectroscopy (TDLAS). On September 18, an intercomparison flight was conducted between two separate instruments, both employing the VUV fluorescence method, on the NOAA WP‐3 and the U.K. Meteorological Office C‐130 Hercules. The results indicate that both of the VUV fluorescence instruments and the TDLAS system are capable of measuring ambient CO accurately and precisely with no apparent interferences in 5 s. The accuracy of the measurements, based upon three independent calibration systems, is indicated by the agreement to within 11% with systematic offsets of less than 1 ppbv. In addition, one of the groups participated in the Measurement of Air Pollution From Satellite (MAPS) intercomparison [ Novelli et al ., 1998] with a different measurement technique but very similar calibration system, and agreed with the accepted analysis to within 5%. The precision of the measurements is indicated by the variability of the ratio of simultaneous measurements from the separate instruments. This variability is consistent with the estimated precisions of 1.5 ppbv and 2.2 ppbv for the 5 s average results of the C‐130 and the WP‐3 instruments, respectively, and indicates a precision of approximately 3.6% for the TDLAS instrument. The excellent agreement of the instruments in both intercomparisons demonstrates that significant interferences in the measurements are absent in air masses that ranged from 7 km in the midtroposphere to boundary layer conditions including subtropical marine air and continental outflow with embedded urban plumes. The intercomparison of the two VUV instruments that differed widely in their design indicates that the VUV fluorescence technique for CO measurements is not particularly sensitive to the details of its implementation. These intercomparisons help to establish the reliability of ambient CO measurements by the VUV fluorescence technique.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.510
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations156
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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