Improving the Accuracy of Daily Satellite-Derived Ground-Level Fine Aerosol Concentration Estimates for North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".