MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125940639 · doi:10.5194/acp-9-733-2009

Intercomparison of Aerosol Optical Depth from Brewer Ozone spectrophotometers and CIMEL sunphotometers measurements

2009· article· en· W2125940639 on OpenAlexaff
Anne Cheymol, Luis González Sotelino, K. S. Lam, Jhoon Kim, Vitali Fioletov, A. M. Siani, H. De Backer

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric chemistry and physics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric aerosols and clouds
Canadian institutionsGDG Environnement
FundersMinistry of Environment
KeywordsAERONETAerosolEnvironmental scienceOzoneRemote sensingCorrelation coefficientAtmospheric sciencesMeteorologyPhysicsGeologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The Langley plot method applied on the Brewer Ozone measurements can provide accurate Aerosol Optical Depth (AOD) in the UV-B. We present seven intercomparisons between AOD retrieved from Brewer Ozone measurements at 320 nm and AOD measured by CIMEL sunphotometer at 340 nm or 440 nm (shifted to 320 nm in using the Angström's law), which are stored in the international AERONET database. Only the intercomparisons between co-located instruments can be used to validate the Langley Plot Method applied to the Brewer measurements: in this case, all the correlation coefficients are above 0.82. If the instruments are not at the same site, the correlation between the AOD retrieved by both instruments is much lower. In applying the Angström's law the intercomparison is improved compared to previous study.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 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

Citations17
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmospheric chemistry and physicsSame topicAtmospheric aerosols and cloudsFrench-language works237,207