Comprehensive Assessment of Global Surface Net Radiation Products and Uncertainty Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Earth surface net radiation ( R n ) characterizes the surface radiation budget and plays a critical role in ecological, biogeochemical, and hydrological processes. The R n products from remote sensing and reanalysis have not been validated comprehensively. In this study, four R n products (Clouds and the Earth's Radiant Energy System [CERES], ERA‐Interim, Modern‐Era Retrospective analysis for Research and Applications version 2, and Japanese 55‐year Reanalysis) were validated using global ground measurements on monthly (255 sites) and annual (172 sites) timescales. These products have similar accuracies, with average root‐mean‐square error (RMSE) ranges of 5.35 W m −2 (monthly) and 2.30 W m −2 (annually). However, varying accuracies and systemic biases exist across different climatic zones. The annual land R n intercomparison illustrates that large uncertainty exists over polar regions and deserts. A significantly negative annual anomaly in the CERES product for the 2001–2008 period is identified when examining annual R n anomalies over the global land surface. Detailed uncertainty analysis indicates that the global CERES R n anomaly is mainly due to different versions of input data such as aerosol optical thickness and atmospheric profiles (in 2006 and 2008) and cloud properties (in 2002). This work demonstrates that temporal analysis provides powerful quality control for global time series satellite products when the validation using ground measurements fails to capture potential issues.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".