Validation of ozone measurements from the Atmospheric Chemistry Experiment (ACE)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. This paper presents extensive {bias determination} analyses of ozone observations from the Atmospheric Chemistry Experiment (ACE) satellite instruments: the ACE Fourier Transform Spectrometer (ACE-FTS) and the Measurement of Aerosol Extinction in the Stratosphere and Troposphere Retrieved by Occultation (ACE-MAESTRO) instrument. Here we compare the latest ozone data products from ACE-FTS and ACE-MAESTRO with coincident observations from nearly 20 satellite-borne, airborne, balloon-borne and ground-based instruments, by analysing volume mixing ratio profiles and partial column densities. The ACE-FTS version 2.2 Ozone Update product reports more ozone than most correlative measurements from the upper troposphere to the lower mesosphere. At altitude levels from 16 to 44 km, the average values of the mean relative differences are nearly all within +1 to +8%. At higher altitudes (45–60 km), the ACE-FTS ozone amounts are significantly larger than those of the comparison instruments, with mean relative differences of up to +40% (about +20% on average). For the ACE-MAESTRO version 1.2 ozone data product, mean relative differences are within ±10% (average values within ±6%) between 18 and 40 km for both the sunrise and sunset measurements. At higher altitudes (~35–55 km), systematic biases of opposite sign are found between the ACE-MAESTRO sunrise and sunset observations. While ozone amounts derived from the ACE-MAESTRO sunrise occultation data are often smaller than the coincident observations (with mean relative differences down to −10%), the sunset occultation profiles for ACE-MAESTRO show results that are qualitatively similar to ACE-FTS, indicating a large positive bias (mean relative differences within +10 to +30%) in the 45–55 km altitude range. In contrast, there is no significant systematic difference in bias found for the ACE-FTS sunrise and sunset measurements.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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".