MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129437219 · doi:10.5194/amt-4-1905-2011

An improved tropospheric NO <sub>2</sub> column retrieval algorithm for the Ozone Monitoring Instrument

2011· article· en· W2129437219 on OpenAlexfundno aff
K. F. Boersma, H. J. Eskes, Ruud Dirksen, R. J. van der A, Pepijn Veefkind, P. Stammes, Vincent Huijnen, Q. Kleipool, Maarten Sneep, J. Claas, Joana Leitão, Andreas Richter, Y. Zhou, Dominik Brunner

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric measurement techniques · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekDalhousie UniversityNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsOzone Monitoring InstrumentEnvironmental scienceTroposphereNadirAlbedo (alchemy)Tropospheric ozoneMeteorologyAltitude (triangle)Air mass (solar energy)Remote sensingSatelliteAtmospheric sciencesAir quality indexBoundary layerPhysicsMathematicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. We present an improved tropospheric nitrogen dioxide column retrieval algorithm (DOMINO v2.0) for OMI based on better air mass factors (AMFs) and a correction for across-track stripes resulting from calibration errors in the OMI backscattered reflectances. Since October 2004, NO2 retrievals from the Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI), a UV/Vis nadir spectrometer onboard NASA's EOS-Aura satellite, have been used with success in several scientific studies focusing on air quality monitoring, detection of trends, and NOx emission estimates. Dedicated evaluations of previous DOMINO tropospheric NO2 retrievals indicated their good quality, but also suggested that the tropospheric columns were susceptible to high biases (by 0–40%), probably because of errors in the air mass factor calculations. Here we update the DOMINO air mass factor approach. We calculate a new look-up table (LUT) for altitude-dependent AMFs based on more realistic atmospheric profile parameters, and include more surface albedo and surface pressure reference points than before. We improve the sampling of the TM4 model, resulting in a priori NO2 profiles that are better mixed throughout the boundary layer. We evaluate the NO2 profiles simulated with the improved TM4 sampling as used in the AMF calculations and show that they are highly consistent with in situ NO2 measurements from aircraft during the INTEX-A and INTEX-B campaigns in 2004 and 2006. Our air mass factor calculations are further updated by the implementation of a high-resolution terrain height and a high-resolution surface albedo climatology based on OMI measurements. Together with a correction for across-track stripes, the overall impact of the improved terrain height and albedo descriptions is modest (&lt;5%) on average over large polluted areas, but still causes significant changes locally. The main changes in the DOMINO v2.0 algorithm follow from the new LUT and the improved TM4 sampling that results in more NO2 simulated aloft, where sensitivity to NO2 is higher, and amount to reductions in tropospheric NO2 columns of up to 20% in winter, and 10% in summer over extended polluted areas. We investigate the impact of aerosols on the NO2 retrieval, and based on a comparison of concurrent retrievals of clouds from OMI and aerosols from MODIS Aqua, we find empirical evidence that OMI cloud retrievals are sensitive to the presence of scattering aerosols. It follows that an implicit correction for the effects of aerosols occurs through the aerosol-induced cloud parameters in DOMINO, and we show that such an empirical correction amounts to a 20 %AMF reduction in summer and ±10% changes in winter over the eastern United States.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations764
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmospheric measurement techniquesSame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207