MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2325187418 · doi:10.1021/es3025319

Improving the Accuracy of Daily Satellite-Derived Ground-Level Fine Aerosol Concentration Estimates for North America

2012· article· en· W2325187418 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Aaron van Donkelaar, Randall V. Martin, A. N. Pasch, J. Szykman, Lin Zhang, Yuxuan Wang, Dan Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric aerosols and clouds
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersGovernment of CanadaNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsAerosolSatelliteEnvironmental scienceGround levelMeteorologyAtmospheric sciencesRemote sensingGeographyGeologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We improve the accuracy of daily ground-level fine particulate matter concentrations (PM(2.5)) derived from satellite observations (MODIS and MISR) of aerosol optical depth (AOD) and chemical transport model (GEOS-Chem) calculations of the relationship between AOD and PM(2.5). This improvement is achieved by (1) applying climatological ground-based regional bias-correction factors based upon comparison with in situ PM(2.5), and (2) applying spatial smoothing to reduce random uncertainty and extend coverage. Initial daily 1-σ mean uncertainties are reduced across the United States and southern Canada from ± (1 μg/m(3) + 67%) to ± (1 μg/m(3) + 54%) by applying the climatological ground-based regional scaling factors. Spatial interpolation increases the coverage of satellite-derived PM(2.5) estimates without increased uncertainty when in close proximity to direct AOD retrievals. Spatial smoothing further reduces the daily 1-σ uncertainty to ±(1 μg/m(3) + 42%) by limiting the random component of uncertainty. We additionally find similar performance for climatological relationships of AOD to PM(2.5) as compared to day-specific relationships.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.318
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations80
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicAtmospheric aerosols and cloudsFrench-language works237,207