Comparison of Temperature and Ozone Profiles Derived from Lidar and SAGE II Measurements over Toronto Region:Part II
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Based on the observational data of ISTS Differential Absorption Lidar (DIAL) and NASA Stratospheric Aerosol and Gas Experiment Ⅱ (SAGE Ⅱ) in 1994 and 1995,the temperature and ozone profiles derived from the two measurement systems over Toronto region are analyzed and compared.It is indicated by the results that ① The temperature profiles derived from the SAGE Ⅱ observations is in good agreement with those from DIAL measurement,especially in the vertical range of 15.5-35.5?km;② in the vertical range of 15.5-40.5?km,the range of absolute difference between LIDAR and SAGE Ⅱ ozone mixing ratio is roughly in agreement within ±2×10 -6 (volume fraction);③ under usual conditions,below 35?km or so,ozone number density profiles derived from DIAL measurement possess higher precision than that from SAGE Ⅱ measurement,and above this altitude,vice versa.Specially,over the altitude range from 21.5-35.5?km,including the maximum O 3 number density layer,the 8-profile-averaged relative difference is extremely close to zero,and the vertical mean value is 0.96±7.64% (1σ).
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".