Validation of Aura Microwave Limb Sounder HCl measurements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Earth Observing System (EOS) Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS) aboard the Aura satellite has provided daily global HCl profiles since August 2004. We provide a characterization of the resolution, random and systematic uncertainties, and known issues for the version 2.2 MLS HCl data. The MLS sampling allows for comparisons with many (∼1500 to more than 3000) closely matched profiles from the Halogen Occultation Experiment (HALOE) and Atmospheric Chemistry Experiment Fourier Transform Spectrometer (ACE‐FTS). These data sets provide HCl latitudinal distributions that are, overall, very similar to those from (coincident) MLS profiles, although there are some discrepancies in the upper stratosphere between the MLS and HALOE gradients. As found in previous work, MLS and ACE HCl profiles agree very well (within ∼5%, on average), but the MLS HCl abundances are generally larger (by 10–20%) than HALOE HCl. The bias versus HALOE is unlikely to arise mostly from MLS, as a similar systematic bias (of order 15%) is not observed between average MLS and balloon‐borne measurements of HCl, obtained over Fort Sumner, New Mexico, in 2004 and 2005. At the largest pressure (147 hPa) for MLS HCl, a high bias (∼0.2 ppbv) is apparent in analyses of low to midlatitude data versus in situ aircraft chemical ionization mass spectrometry (CIMS) HCl measurements from the Aura Validation Experiment (AVE) campaigns in 2004, 2005, and 2006; this bias is also observed in comparisons of MLS and aircraft HCl/O3 correlations. Good agreement between MLS and CIMS HCl is obtained at 100 to 68 hPa. The recommended pressure range for MLS HCl is from 100 to 0.15 hPa.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".