Comparison of the satellite and ground-based measurements of the hydrogen fluoride content in the atmosphere
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Satellite and ground-based measurements of the hydrogen fluoride (HF) total content (TC) are analyzed and compared. The HF profiles measured with an FTS device on the ACE satellite are used to calculate the TC and compare it with the ground-based measurements near St. Petersburg in 2009–2011. A comparison indicated that the seasonal variations in HF TC based on two independent measurements are in good qualitative agreement. Rare (nine) cases of direct comparison between two measurement types coordinated with respect to time (during the day) and site (no farther than 500 km) gave the following characteristics: the average difference is 8% and satellite data predominate over ground data; the standard deviation of a difference is 7%. In two cases of close measurement pairs (closer than 200 km), a comparison gave differences of 1 and 7%. The statistical characteristics of differences between two measurement types are in good agreement with the independent comparison of the ACE-FTS HF TC measurements with the NDACC network data.
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".