MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152938521 · doi:10.1029/2004jd005741

Odin/SMR limb observations of stratospheric trace gases: Level 2 processing of ClO, N<sub>2</sub>O, HNO<sub>3</sub>, and O<sub>3</sub>

2005· article· en· W2152938521 on OpenAlexfundno aff
J. Urban, Nicolas Lautié, É. Le Flochmoën, C. Jiménez, Patrick Eriksson, J. de La Noë, É. Dupuy, Mattias Ekström, L. El Amraoui, U. Frisk, D. Murtagh, M. Olberg, Philippe Ricaud

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Space AgencyTekesCentre National d’Etudes Spatiales
KeywordsRadiometerTrace gasSatelliteAltitude (triangle)Remote sensingEnvironmental scienceStratosphereOn boardMeteorologyAtmospheric sciencesPhysicsGeologyAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Sub‐Millimetre Radiometer (SMR) on board the Odin satellite, launched on 20 February 2001, observes key species with respect to stratospheric chemistry and dynamics such as O3, ClO, N2O, and HNO3 using two bands centered at 501.8 and 544.6 GHz. We present the adopted methodology for level 2 processing and the achieved in‐orbit measurement capabilities of the SMR radiometer for these species in terms of altitude range, altitude resolution, and measurement precision. The characteristics of the relevant level 2 data versions, namely version 1.2 of the operational processor as well as versions 222 and 223 of the reference code, are discussed and differences are evaluated. An analysis of systematic retrieval errors, resulting from spectroscopic and instrumental uncertainties, is also presented.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations150
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicAtmospheric Ozone and ClimateFrench-language works237,207