MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096719695 · doi:10.5194/amt-7-731-2014

Validation of FORMOSAT-3/COSMIC level 2 "atmPrf" global temperature data in the stratosphere

2014· article· en· W2096719695 on OpenAlexaff
Uma Das, Chunhong Pan

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric measurement techniques · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNational Science CouncilNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationMet Office
KeywordsCOSMIC cancer databaseRadio occultationEnvironmental scienceAtmosphere (unit)Atmospheric sciencesStratosphereIonosphereSatelliteMeteorologyClimatologyPhysicsGeologyAstrophysicsAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. GPS radio occultations by Formosa Satellite mission-3/Constellation Observing System for Meteorology, Ionosphere, and Climate (FORMOSAT-3/COSMIC) provide bending angle profiles, which are further processed to give profiles of temperature and water vapour in the lower atmosphere and electron density in the upper atmosphere. The level 2 "atmPrf" (atmospheric profile) product of version 2010.2640 gives temperature from surface to 0.2 hPa (~ 60 km). This is a dry temperature data product that does not include relative humidity in the inversion process and hence is reliable at altitudes < 100 hPa and erroneous at lower altitudes. In the current study we compare the COSMIC "atmPrf" data from December 2010 to November 2011 with other satellite (SABER/TIMED and MLS/Aura) temperatures from 50 to 0.2 hPa, COSMIC "wetPrf" data and reanalysis (NCEP, ERA-Interim and UKMO) outputs at 100, 10, 1 and 0.5 hPa pressure levels. The satellite comparisons show that below 1 hPa the observed median differences are most likely produced due to the biases in the retrievals of SABER and MLS. "atmPrf" and "wetPrf" temperatures compare extremely well in the common altitudes with differences being absolute zero between 200 and 10 hPa. When compared to reanalysis outputs, COSMIC seasonal means match NCEP and ECMWF seasonal mean temperatures very well, especially at 100 and 10 hPa. We conclude from this study that with the COSMIC dry temperature retrievals obtained from radio occultations of GPS, there is a 20 km extension of reliable data in the middle atmosphere. "atmPrf" data are of good quality and provide reliable and unprecedentedly large number of profiles at greater temporal and spatial resolutions for further studies and investigations of the middle atmosphere up to 1 hPa, i.e., approximately up to the stratopause at around 50 km.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.630
Threshold uncertainty score0.911

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.228 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations29
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmospheric measurement techniquesSame topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsFrench-language works237,207