MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107877005 · doi:10.1029/2007jd009711

AIRS views transport from 12 to 22 July 2004 Alaskan/Canadian fires: Correlation of AIRS CO and MODIS AOD with forward trajectories and comparison of AIRS CO retrievals with DC‐8 in situ measurements during INTEX‐A/ICARTT

2008· article· en· W2107877005 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
W. W. McMillan, J. X. Warner, M. M. Comer, E. Maddy, A. Chu, L. C. Sparling, E. W. Eloranta, R. M. Hoff, G. W. Sachse, C. Barnet, I. A. Razenkov, W. Wolf

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtmospheric Infrared SounderTroposphereEnvironmental scienceMeteorologySatelliteAtmospheric sciencesClimatologyChemical transport modelGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present observations of transport of tropospheric carbon monoxide (CO) obtained by the Atmospheric Infrared Sounder (AIRS) on board NASA's Aqua satellite during the Intercontinental Chemical Transport Experiment–North America (INTEX‐A) field campaign in the summer of 2004, part of the International Consortium for Atmospheric Research on Transport and Transformation (ICARTT). In situ measurements from NASA's DC‐8 provide crucial assessment of AIRS midtropospheric (400–500 mbar) CO retrievals. For the nine best INTEX‐A profiles, convolution of the in situ profiles with AIRS verticality functions demonstrates version 4 AIRS CO retrievals between 400 and 500 mbar are biased high by approximately 8% with a standard deviation slightly less than 5%. The 400–500 mbar region is the only portion of the version 4 AIRS CO retrievals that can be validated as presented here. In some cases, AIRS CO retrievals may be sensitive to CO in the lower to midtroposphere (800–500 mbar). Focusing on one major episode, we investigate transport of CO from a large fire outbreak in the Alaskan/Canadian Yukon region from 11 to 14 July 2004 and follow it downwind to the southeastern United States and Europe by 22 July 2004. Comparison of AIRS CO maps and forward trajectories from fire locations reveals substantial variations in fire emissions especially emission injection height. Any useful forecast model must control for such fire emission variabilities to predict correctly the downwind impact. To match the forward trajectory analyses with AIRS CO observations requires some fires to have directly injected emissions to at least 500 mbar and perhaps as high as 300 mbar. Ground‐based lidar observations show smoke plume altitudes from 3 to 11 km over Wisconsin and from 1 to 4 km over Maryland in agreement with the forward trajectories. The Wisconsin lidar profiles on the afternoon of 18 July 2004 constrain the altitude of CO‐rich smoke observed by AIRS and MODIS to lie between 2 and 5.5 km above the surface, roughly 800 to 500 mbar. We find that changes in the correlation between AIRS CO and MODIS AOD reflect changes in the CO vertical distribution during this event. This finding is confirmed by in situ measurements, meteorological analyses, and forward trajectory analyses.

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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations61
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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