An evaluation of Odin/OSIRIS limb pointing and stratospheric ozone through comparisons with ozonesondes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Five-plus years of Odin/OSIRIS (Optical Spectrograph and Infrared Imager System) ozone profiles (version 3.0 and SaskMART) have been compared with coincident ozonesonde profiles from the tropopause to the middle stratosphere (~10–35 km). The OSIRIS(v3.0)-sonde comparisons, together with the “knee” technique, suggest that OSIRIS pointing is stable with an accuracy (systematic uncertainty) of 100~m and a precision (random uncertainty) of 400 m. Comparison of coincident profiles revealed excellent overall agreement with differences generally not exceeding 10% between 10 and 35 km. During periods of satellite eclipse larger differences above 25 km were found and concluded to be the result of flexing of the spacecraft frame brought about by cooling. Uncertainties derived from the intercomparison suggest an OSIRIS precision of 25–30% at 10 km, reaching a minimum of about 4–6% in the middle-stratosphere (23–28 km), and 6–8% at 35 km. Ozonesonde uncertainties were also derived and found to be slightly larger in the tropics than mid-latitudes, possibly due to a lack of column normalization at some of the tropical stations. OSIRIS SaskMART ozone, an alternative ozone data product, was found to be very comparable with the v3.0 ozone, with slightly smaller biases relative to the ozonesondes. OSIRIS is concluded to be a robust and accurate source of stratospheric ozone profiles. PACS Nos.: 82.33.Tb, 95.75.Qr, 42.68.–w
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".