MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161566772 · doi:10.1029/2005gl022425

Atmospheric Chemistry Experiment (ACE) Arctic stratospheric measurements of NO<sub>x</sub> during February and March 2004: Impact of intense solar flares

2005· article· en· W2161566772 on OpenAlexaff
C. P. Rinsland, C. D. Boone, Ray Nassar, Kaley A. Walker, P. F. Bernath, J. C. McConnell, Linda Chiou

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStratosphereAtmospheric sciencesPolar vortexMixing ratioEnvironmental scienceOccultationPolar nightArcticSolar flareAtmospheric chemistryClimatologyOzonePhysicsMeteorologyGeologyAstrophysicsOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Solar occultation measurements recorded in the Arctic by the Atmospheric Chemistry Experiment (ACE) Fourier transform spectrometer show elevated volume mixing ratios of NO and NO 2 in the upper stratosphere from mid‐February to late March 2004. Mixing ratios of NO exceeded 1.3 ppmv (10 −6 parts per million by volume) during mid‐February and are higher than any values previously reported in the Arctic during late winter and early spring. The elevated NO x (NO + NO 2 ) mixing ratios likely resulted from particle emissions by intense solar flares that occurred the previous October and November followed by NO x production and downward transport to the upper stratospheric vortex where the elevated levels persisted due to the long lifetime of NO x during darkness in polar winter and early spring. The descent and the NO x decrease rates in the upper stratospheric vortex are estimated from an analysis of the time series. The measured descent rate is compared with previous observations and model predictions.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.656
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations58
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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