MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2229417235 · doi:10.1175/jtech-d-15-0166.1

Sensor-Specific Error Statistics for SST in the Advanced Clear-Sky Processor for Oceans

2016· article· en· W2229417235 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Boris Petrenko, Alexander Ignatov, Yury Kihai, Prasanjit Dash

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceDaytimeClimatologyResidualRegressionMeteorologyMean squared errorStatisticsComputer scienceAtmospheric sciencesMathematicsAlgorithmGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The formulation of the sensor-specific error statistics (SSES) has been redesigned in the latest implementation of the NOAA Advanced Clear-Sky Processor for Oceans (ACSPO) to enable efficient use of SSES for assimilation of the ACSPO baseline regression SST (BSST) into level 4 (L4) analyses. The SSES algorithm employs segmentation of the SST domain in the space of regressors and derives the segmentation parameter from the statistics of regressors within the global dataset of matchups. For each segment, local regression coefficients and standard deviations (SDs) of BSST minus in situ SST are calculated from the corresponding subset of matchups. The local regression coefficients are used to generate an auxiliary product—piecewise regression (PWR) SST—and SSES biases are estimated as differences between BSST and PWR SST. Correction of SSES biases, which transforms BSST back into PWR SST, reduces the effects of residual cloud; variations in view zenith angle; and, during the daytime, diurnal surface warming. This results in significant reduction in the global SD of fitting in situ SST, making it comparable with SD for the Canadian Meteorological Centre (CMC) L4 SST. Unlike the foundation CMC SST (which is consistent with in situ SST at night but biased cold during the daytime), the PWR SST is consistent with in situ data during both day and night and thus may be viewed as an estimate of “depth” in situ SST. The PWR SST is expected to be a useful input into L4 SST analyses, especially for foundation SST products, such as the CMC L4.

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)0.007
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations33
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Atmospheric and Oceanic TechnologySame topicMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsFrench-language works237,207