Validation of Tropospheric Emission Spectrometer (TES) nadir ozone profiles using ozonesonde measurements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We compare Tropospheric Emission Spectrometer (TES) version 2 (V002) nadir ozone profiles with ozonesonde profiles from the Intercontinental Chemical Transport Experiment Ozonesonde Network Study, the World Ozone and Ultraviolet Data Center, the Global Monitoring Division of the Earth System Research Laboratory, and the Southern Hemisphere Additional Ozonesonde archives. Approximately 1600 coincidences spanning 72.5°S–80.3°N from October 2004 to October 2006 are found. The TES averaging kernel and constraint are applied to the ozonesonde data to account for the TES measurement sensitivity and vertical resolution. TES sonde differences are examined in six latitude zones after excluding profiles with thick high clouds. Values for the bias and standard deviation are determined using correlations of mean values of TES ozone and sonde ozone in the upper troposphere (UT) and lower troposphere (LT). The UT biases range from 2.9 to 10.6 ppbv, and the LT biases range from 3.7 to 9.2 ppbv, excluding the Arctic and Antarctic LT where TES sensitivity is low. A similar approach is used to assess seasonal differences in the northern midlatitudes where the density and frequency of sonde measurements are greatest. These results are briefly compared to TES V001 ozone validation work which also used ozonesondes but was carried out prior to improvements in the radiometric calibration and ozone retrieval in V002. Overall, the large number of TES and sonde comparisons indicate a positive bias of approximately 3–10 ppbv for the TES V002 nadir ozone data set and have helped to identify areas of potential improvement for future retrieval versions.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".