Comparison of atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub> observed by GOSAT and two ground stations in China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) column concentrations observed by the Greenhouse Gases Observing Satellite (GOSAT) and ground stations at Mt Waliguan (36.29° N, 100.90° E) and Lulin (23.47° N, 120.87° E) in China are compared. The data covered time periods from June 2009 to November 2011 for GOSAT and from July 2009 to December 2010 for the ground stations. The GOSAT monthly mean data tend to be generally smaller than those of the ground measurements by 5–10 ppm. The spatial and temporal variations of the atmospheric XCO2 (dry air, column averaged, molar fraction of CO2) concentrations, especially in the regions of China, are analysed by using the GOSAT monthly mean data. The variations are more significant in the northern hemisphere than in the southern hemisphere and show relatively high values and obvious fluctuations in the 15° N–45° N latitudinal band. These are generally consistent with the measurements of the Scanning Imaging Absorption Spectrometer for Atmospheric Cartography (SCIAMACHY) and Atmospheric Infrared Sounder (AIRS). The satellite data show significant seasonal variations, with maximum in April and May and minimum in September and October. This feature is in general agreement with that of the ground observations and previous reports. In the regions of China, the XCO2 ranged from 355 ppm to 385 ppm with a mean of 374 ppm, which is in agreement with the global concentration.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".