MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2203534137 · doi:10.1175/jamc-d-15-0208.1

Assimilation of Infrared Radiance Observations with Sensitivity to Land Surfaces in the Canadian Ensemble–Variational System

2015· article· en· W2203534137 on OpenAlexaffabout
Suryendu Dutta, Louis Garand, Sylvain Heilliette

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadianceEnvironmental scienceData assimilationRadiosondeAtmospheric Infrared SounderEmissivityTroposphereDepth soundingClimatologyMeteorologyNorthern HemisphereRemote sensingAtmospheric sciencesGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study highlights recent progress at the Canadian Meteorological Centre in the assimilation of Atmospheric Infrared Sounder (AIRS) and Infrared Atmospheric Sounding Interferometer (IASI) radiance observations that are sensitive to land surfaces. The assimilation is carried out using the Canadian global ensemble–variational system. That system benefits from flow-dependent background-error statistics that include covariances between surface skin temperature and atmospheric variables. Up to 142 channels from both AIRS and IASI are assimilated. A detailed database of spectral surface emissivity is used. Forecasts are evaluated against ERA-Interim analyses, own-cycle analyses, and radiosonde observations. A conservative approach is taken, with restrictive conditions on topography and surface emissivity. From 2-month assimilation experiments, a significant positive impact is obtained in the Northern Hemisphere extratropics beyond day 2 from the surface to the upper troposphere. The impact is mixed in other regions, depending on level or forecast lead time. Causes for these mixed results are examined in view of future experiments and eventual operational implementation.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.167
Threshold uncertainty score0.845

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Meteorology and ClimatologySame topicMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsFrench-language works237,207