MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104616124 · doi:10.1029/2005gl022396

Comparisons between ACE‐FTS and ground‐based measurements of stratospheric HCl and ClONO<sub>2</sub> loadings at northern latitudes

2005· article· en· W2104616124 on OpenAlexaffabout
Emmanuel Mahieu, R. Zander, P. Duchatelet, James W. Hannigan, M. T. Coffey, S. Mikuteit, Frank Hase, Thomas Blumenstock, Aldona Wiacek, Kimberly Strong, Jeffrey R. Taylor, R. L. Mittermeier, H. Fast, C. D. Boone, Sean D. McLeod, Kaley A. Walker, P. F. Bernath, C. P. Rinsland

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStratosphereAtmospheric sciencesAtmospheric chemistryEnvironmental scienceLatitudeNorthern HemisphereMixing ratioMiddle latitudesClimatologyAtmosphere of EarthHydrogen chlorideAtmosphere (unit)OzoneMeteorologyChemistryGeologyPhysicsGeodesy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report first comparisons of stratospheric column abundances of hydrogen chloride (HCl) and chlorine nitrate (ClONO 2 ) derived from infrared solar spectra recorded in 2004 at selected northern latitudes by the spaceborne Atmospheric Chemistry Experiment‐Fourier Transform Spectrometer (ACE‐FTS) and by Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) instruments at the NDSC (Network for Detection of Stratospheric Change)‐affiliated sites of Thule (Greenland), Kiruna (Sweden), Jungfraujoch (Switzerland), and Egbert and Toronto (Canada). Overall, and within the respective uncertainties of the independent measurement approaches, the comparisons show that the ACE‐FTS measurements produce very good stratospheric volume mixing ratio profiles. Their internal precision allows to identify characteristic distribution features associated with latitudinal, dynamical, seasonal and chemical changes occurring in the atmosphere.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.615

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 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

Citations48
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicAtmospheric Ozone and ClimateFrench-language works237,207