Constraining ecosystem processes from tower fluxes and atmospheric profiles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The planetary boundary layer (PBL) provides an important link between the scales and processes resolved by global atmospheric sampling/modeling and site-based flux measurements. The PBL is in direct contact with the land surface, both driving and responding to ecosystem processes. Measurements within the PBL (e.g., by radiosondes, aircraft profiles, and flask measurements) have a footprint, and thus an integrating scale, on the order of 1-100 km. We use the coupled atmosphere-biosphere model (CAB) and a Bayesian data assimilation framework to investigate the amount of biosphere process information that can be inferred from PBL measurements. We investigate the information content of PBL measurements in a two-stage study. First, we demonstrate consistency between the coupled model (CAB) and measurements, by comparing the model to eddy covariance flux tower measurements (i.e., water and carbon fluxes) and also PBL scalar profile measurements (i.e., water, carbon dioxide, and temperature) from Canadian boreal forest. Second, we use the CAB model in a set of Bayesian inversions experiments using synthetic data for a single day. In the synthetic experiment, leaf area and respiration were relatively well constrained, whereas surface albedo and plant hydraulic conductance were only moderately constrained. Finally, the abilities of the PBL profiles and the eddy covariance data to constrain the parameters were largely similar and only slightly lower than the combination of both observations.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".