A Kalman-filter bias correction of ozone deterministic, ensemble-averaged, and probabilistic forecasts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Kalman filtering (KF) is used to postprocess numerical-model output to estimate systematic errors in surface ozone forecasts. It is implemented with a recursive algorithm that updates its estimate of future ozone-concentration bias by using past forecasts and observations. KF performance is tested for three types of ozone forecasts: deterministic, ensemble-averaged, and probabilistic forecasts. Eight photochemical models were run for 56 days during summer 2004 over northeastern USA and southern Canada as part of the International Consortium for Atmospheric Research on Transport and Transformation New England Air Quality (AQ) Study. The raw and KF-corrected predictions are compared with ozone measurements from the Aerometric Information Retrieval Now data set, which includes roughly 360 surface stations. The completeness of the data set allowed a thorough sensitivity test of key KF parameters. It is found that the KF improves forecasts of ozone-concentration magnitude and the ability to predict rare events, both for deterministic and ensemble-averaged forecasts. It also improves the ability to predict the daily maximum ozone concentration, and reduces the time lag between the forecast and observed maxima. For this case study, KF considerably improves the predictive skill of probabilistic forecasts of ozone concentration greater than thresholds of 10 to 50 ppbv, but it degrades it for thresholds of 70 to 90 ppbv. Moreover, KF considerably reduces probabilistic forecast bias. The significance of KF postprocessing and ensemble-averaging is that they are both effective for real-time AQ forecasting. KF reduces systematic errors, whereas ensemble-averaging reduces random errors. When combined they produce the best overall forecast.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".