MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167414928 · doi:10.5194/acp-9-3233-2009

Comparison of CMAM simulations of carbon monoxide (CO), nitrous oxide (N <sub>2</sub> O), and methane (CH <sub>4</sub> ) with observations from Odin/SMR, ACE-FTS, and Aura/MLS

2009· article· en· W2167414928 on OpenAlexafffund
J. J. Jin, K. Semeniuk, S. R. Beagley, V. I. Fomichev, A. I. Jonsson, J. C. McConnell, J. Urban, D. Murtagh, G. L. Manney, C. D. Boone, P. F. Bernath, Kaley A. Walker, Brice Barret, Philippe Ricaud, É. Dupuy

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric chemistry and physics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of TorontoYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNatural Environment Research CouncilCanadian Space AgencyCentre National d’Etudes SpatialesJet Propulsion LaboratoryTekesOntario Innovation TrustSight Research UKNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationCalifornia Institute of TechnologyEuropean Space AgencyCanadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
KeywordsStratosphereAtmospheric sciencesMesosphereMicrowave Limb SounderSudden stratospheric warmingAtmospheric modelChemistryEnvironmental sciencePhysicsPolar vortexMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Simulations of CO, N2O and CH4 from a coupled chemistry-climate model (CMAM) are compared with satellite measurements from Odin Sub-Millimeter Radiometer (Odin/SMR), Atmospheric Chemistry Experiment Fourier Transform Spectrometer (ACE-FTS), and Aura Microwave Limb Sounder (Aura/MLS). Pressure-latitude cross-sections and seasonal time series demonstrate that CMAM reproduces the observed global CO, N2O, and CH4 distributions quite well. Generally, excellent agreement with measurements is found between CO simulations and observations in the stratosphere and mesosphere. Differences between the simulations and the ACE-FTS observations are generally within 30%, and the differences between CMAM results and SMR and MLS observations are slightly larger. These differences are comparable with the difference between the instruments in the upper stratosphere and mesosphere. Comparisons of N2O show that CMAM results are usually within 15% of the measurements in the lower and middle stratosphere, and the observations are close to each other. However, the standard version of CMAM has a low N2O bias in the upper stratosphere. The CMAM CH4 distribution also reproduces the observations in the lower stratosphere, but has a similar but smaller negative bias in the upper stratosphere. The negative bias may be due to that the gravity drag is not fully resolved in the model. The simulated polar CO evolution in the Arctic and Antarctic agrees with the ACE and MLS observations. CO measurements from 2006 show evidence of enhanced descent of air from the mesosphere into the stratosphere in the Arctic after strong stratospheric sudden warmings (SSWs). CMAM also shows strong descent of air after SSWs. In the tropics, CMAM captures the annual oscillation in the lower stratosphere and the semiannual oscillations at the stratopause and mesopause seen in Aura/MLS CO and N2O observations and in Odin/SMR N2O observations. The Odin/SMR and Aura/MLS N2O observations also show a quasi-biennial oscillation (QBO) in the upper stratosphere, whereas, the CMAM does not have QBO included. This study confirms that CMAM is able to simulate middle atmospheric transport processes reasonably well.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations36
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmospheric chemistry and physicsSame topicAtmospheric Ozone and ClimateFrench-language works237,207