Bias corrections of GOSAT SWIR XCO<sub>2</sub> and XCH<sub>4</sub> with TCCON data andtheir evaluation using aircraft measurement data
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. We describe a method for removing systematic biases of column-averaged dry air mole fractions of CO2 (XCO2) and CH4 (XCH4) derived from short-wavelength infrared (SWIR) spectra of the Greenhouse gases Observing SATellite (GOSAT). We conduct correlation analyses between the GOSAT biases and simultaneously retrieved auxiliary parameters. We use these correlations to bias correct the GOSAT data, removing these spurious correlations. Data from the Total Carbon Column Observing Network (TCCON) were used as reference values for this regression analysis. To evaluate the effectiveness of this correction method, the uncorrected/corrected GOSAT data were compared to independent XCO2 and XCH4 data derived from aircraft measurements taken for the Comprehensive Observation Network for TRace gases by AIrLiner (CONTRAIL) project, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the US Department of Energy (DOE), the National Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES), the Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA), the HIAPER Pole-to-Pole observations (HIPPO) program, and the GOSAT validation aircraft observation campaign over Japan. These comparisons demonstrate that the empirically derived bias correction improves the agreement between GOSAT XCO2/XCH4 and the aircraft data. Finally, we present spatial distributions and temporal variations of the derived GOSAT biases.
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.
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 | 0.011 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it