MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153742375 · doi:10.1029/2005gl022433

Co‐located ACE‐FTS and Odin/SMR stratospheric‐mesospheric CO 2004 measurements and comparison with a GCM

2005· article· en· W2153742375 on OpenAlexafffund
J. J. Jin, K. Semeniuk, A. I. Jonsson, S. R. Beagley, J. C. McConnell, C. D. Boone, Kaley A. Walker, P. F. Bernath, C. P. Rinsland, É. Dupuy, P. Ricaud, J. de La Noë, J. Urban, D. Murtagh

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooYork University
FundersCanadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
KeywordsStratosphereThermosphereAtmospheric sciencesTroposphereOccultationEnvironmental scienceClimatologyMesosphereLatitudePolar nightPolarArcticMiddle latitudesIonosphereGeologyPhysicsGeophysicsGeodesyAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a comparison of co‐located and near simultaneous CO measurements from January to May, 2004 and from the Arctic to southern polar regions using the ACE‐FTS, in solar occultation mode, and the Odin/SMR, which measures atmospheric emission. We find that there is excellent agreement between the two instruments at the locations investigated over 4 orders of magnitude from the lower stratosphere to the lower thermosphere. There is also good agreement with the CMAM model simulation from 20 km to 90 km in sub‐tropical and tropical latitudes but poorer agreement in the upper stratosphere and lower mesosphere in winter polar regions. For the Arctic in March 2004 this can be attributed, at least partly, to the unique dynamical processes in the stratosphere in the winter of 2003–2004. Clearly CO measurements from these instruments will provide a useful tool for testing model transport from the troposphere to the thermosphere.

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)0.001
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations41
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicAtmospheric Ozone and ClimateFrench-language works237,207