MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115879028 · doi:10.5194/acp-7-1809-2007

Comparison of box-air-mass-factors and radiances for Multiple-Axis Differential Optical Absorption Spectroscopy (MAX-DOAS) geometries calculated from different UV/visible radiative transfer models

2007· article· en· W2115879028 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas Wagner, John P. Burrows, T. Deutschmann, Barbara Dix, C. von Friedeburg, Udo Frieß, F. Hendrick, Klaus-Peter Heue, Hitoshi Irie, Hironobu Iwabuchi, Yugo Kanaya, Johannes Keller, C. A. McLinden, H. Oetjen, Elisa Palazzi, A. Petritoli, U. Platt, O. V. Postylyakov, Jānis Puķīte, Andreas Richter, Michel Van Roozendaël, Alexei Rozanov, В. В. Розанов, R. Sinreich, S. Sanghavi, F. Wittrock

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric chemistry and physics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersJapan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and TechnologyRussian Foundation for Basic Research
KeywordsDifferential optical absorption spectroscopyRadianceRadiative transferAerosolAir mass (solar energy)Remote sensingOptical depthSatelliteAbsorption (acoustics)Environmental scienceAtmospheric opticsAtmospheric radiative transfer codesOpticsMeteorologyPhysicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The results of a comparison exercise of radiative transfer models (RTM) of various international research groups for Multiple AXis Differential Optical Absorption Spectroscopy (MAX-DOAS) viewing geometry are presented. Besides the assessment of the agreement between the different models, a second focus of the comparison was the systematic investigation of the sensitivity of the MAX-DOAS technique under various viewing geometries and aerosol conditions. In contrast to previous comparison exercises, box-air-mass-factors (box-AMFs) for different atmospheric height layers were modelled, which describe the sensitivity of the measurements as a function of altitude. In addition, radiances were calculated allowing the identification of potential errors, which might be overlooked if only AMFs are compared. Accurate modelling of radiances is also a prerequisite for the correct interpretation of satellite observations, for which the received radiance can strongly vary across the large ground pixels, and might be also important for the retrieval of aerosol properties as a future application of MAX-DOAS. The comparison exercises included different wavelengths and atmospheric scenarios (with and without aerosols). The strong and systematic influence of aerosol scattering indicates that from MAX-DOAS observations also information on atmospheric aerosols can be retrieved. During the various iterations of the exercises, the results from all models showed a substantial convergence, and the final data sets agreed for most cases within about 5%. Larger deviations were found for cases with low atmospheric optical depth, for which the photon path lengths along the line of sight of the instrument can become very large. The differences occurred between models including full spherical geometry and those using only plane parallel approximation indicating that the correct treatment of the Earth's sphericity becomes indispensable. The modelled box-AMFs constitute an universal data base for the calculation of arbitrary (total) AMFs by simple convolution with a given trace gas concentration profile. Together with the modelled radiances and the specified settings for the various exercises, they can serve as test cases for future RTM developments.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations195
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmospheric chemistry and physicsSame topicAtmospheric Ozone and ClimateFrench-language works237,207