Validation of Odin/OSIRIS stratospheric NO<sub>2</sub> profiles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the validation study of stratospheric NO2 profiles retrieved from Odin/OSIRIS measurements of limb‐scattered sunlight (version 2.4). The Optical Spectrograph and Infrared Imager System (OSIRIS) NO2 data set is compared to coincident solar occultation measurements by the Halogen Occultation Experiment (HALOE), Stratospheric Aerosol and Gas Experiment (SAGE) II, SAGE III, and Polar Ozone and Aerosol Measurement (POAM) III during the 2002–2004 period. Comparisons with seven Systeme d'Analyse par Observation Zenithal (SAOZ) balloon measurements are also presented. All comparisons show good agreement, with differences, both random and systematic, of less than 20% between 25 km and 35 km. Inconsistencies with SAGE III below 25 km are found to be caused primarily by diurnal effects from varying NO2 concentrations along the SAGE III line‐of‐sight. On the basis of the differences, the OSIRIS random uncertainty is estimated to be 16% between 15 km and 25 km, 6% between 25 km and 35 km, and 9% between 35 km and 40 km. The estimated systematic uncertainty is about 22% between 15 and 25 km, 11–21% between 25 km and 35 km, and 11–31% between 35 km and 40 km. The uncertainties for AM (sunrise) profiles are generally largest and systematic deviations are found to be larger at equatorial latitudes. The results of this validation study show that the OSIRIS NO2 profiles are well behaved, with reasonable uncertainty estimates between 15 km and 40 km. This unique NO2 data set, with more than hemispheric coverage and high vertical resolution will be of particular interest for studies of nitrogen chemistry in the middle atmosphere, which is closely linked to ozone depletion.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".