MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2256633611 · doi:10.5194/acp-16-1289-2016

Estimates of European uptake of CO <sub>2</sub> inferred from GOSAT X <sub> CO <sub>2</sub> </sub> retrievals: sensitivity to measurement bias inside and outside Europe

2016· article· en· W2256633611 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Liang Feng, Paul I. Palmer, Robert J. Parker, Nicholas M. Deutscher, Dietrich G. Feist, Rigel Kivi, Isamu Morino, Ralf Sussmann

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric chemistry and physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEurostarsNational Centre for Earth ObservationNatural Environment Research CouncilCanadian Space AgencyJet Propulsion LaboratoryUniversity of EdinburghUniversity of LeicesterSight Research UKEuropean Space AgencyCalifornia Institute of TechnologyNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsSCIAMACHYFlux (metallurgy)Atmospheric sciencesEnvironmental scienceGreenhouse gasData assimilationChemistryMeteorologyPhysicsGeologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Estimates of the natural CO2 flux over Europe inferred from in situ measurements of atmospheric CO2 mole fraction have been used previously to check top-down flux estimates inferred from space-borne dry-air CO2 column (XCO2) retrievals. Several recent studies have shown that CO2 fluxes inferred from XCO2 data from the Japanese Greenhouse gases Observing SATellite (GOSAT) and the Scanning Imaging Absorption Spectrometer for Atmospheric CHartographY (SCIAMACHY) have larger seasonal amplitudes and a more negative annual net CO2 balance than those inferred from the in situ data. The cause of this elevated European uptake of CO2 is still unclear, but some recent studies have suggested that this is a genuine scientific phenomenon. Here, we put forward an alternative hypothesis and show that realistic levels of bias in GOSAT data can result in an erroneous estimate of elevated uptake over Europe. We use a global flux inversion system to examine the relationship between measurement biases and estimates of CO2 uptake from Europe. We establish a reference in situ inversion that uses an Ensemble Kalman Filter (EnKF) to assimilate conventional surface mole fraction observations and XCO2 retrievals from the surface-based Total Carbon Column Observing Network (TCCON). We use the same EnKF system to assimilate two independent versions of GOSAT XCO2 data. We find that the GOSAT-inferred European terrestrial biosphere uptake peaks during the summer, similar to the reference inversion, but the net annual flux is 1.40 ± 0.19 GtC a−1 compared to a value of 0.58 ± 0.14 GtC a−1 for our control inversion that uses only in situ data. To reconcile these two estimates, we perform a series of numerical experiments that assimilate observations with added biases or assimilate synthetic observations for which part or all of the GOSAT XCO2 data are replaced with model data. We find that for our global flux inversions, a large portion (60–90 %) of the elevated European uptake inferred from GOSAT data in 2010 is due to retrievals outside the immediate European region, while the remainder can largely be explained by a sub-ppm retrieval bias over Europe. We use a data assimilation approach to estimate monthly GOSAT XCO2 biases from the joint assimilation of in situ observations and GOSAT XCO2 retrievals. The inferred biases represent an estimate of systematic differences between GOSAT XCO2 retrievals and the inversion system at regional or sub-regional scales. We find that a monthly varying bias of up to 0.5 ppm can explain an overestimate of the annual sink of up to 0.20 GtC a−1. Our results highlight the sensitivity of CO2 flux estimates to regional observation biases, which have not been fully characterized by the current observation network. Without further dedicated measurements we cannot prove or disprove that European ecosystems are taking up a larger-than-expected amount of CO2. More robust inversion systems are also needed to infer consistent fluxes from multiple observation types.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.178
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.190 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations144
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmospheric chemistry and physicsSame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207