A statistical filtering approach for Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) gravity data
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We describe and analyze a statistical filtering approach for Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) data that uses a parameterized model for the temporal evolution of the GRACE coefficients. After least squares adjustment, a statistical test is performed to assess the significance of the estimated parameters. If the test is passed, the parameters are used by the filter in the reconstruction of the field; otherwise, they are rejected. The test is performed, and the filter is formed, separately for annual components of the model and the trend. This new approach is distinct from Gaussian smoothing since it uses the data themselves to test for specific components of the time‐varying gravity field. The statistical filter appears inherently to remove most of the “stripes” present in the GRACE fields, although destriping the fields prior to filtering seems to help the trend recovery. We demonstrate that the statistical filter produces reasonable maps for the annual components and trend. We furthermore assess the statistical filter for the annual components using ground‐based GPS data in South America by assuming that the annual component of the gravity signal is associated only with groundwater storage. The undestriped, statistically filtered field has a χ 2 value relative to the GPS data consistent with the best result from smoothing. In the space domain, the statistical filters are qualitatively similar to Gaussian smoothing. Unlike Gaussian smoothing, however, the statistical filter has significant sidelobes, including large negative sidelobes on the north‐south axis, potentially revealing information on the errors, and the correlations among the errors, for the GRACE coefficients.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it