The effect of instrumental stray light on Brewer and Dobson total ozone measurements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dobson and Brewer spectrophotometers are the primary, standard instruments for ground-based ozone measurements under the World Meteorological Organization's (WMO) Global Atmosphere Watch program. The accuracy of the data retrieval for both instruments depends on a knowledge of the ozone absorption coefficients and some assumptions underlying the data analysis. Instrumental stray light causes nonlinearity in the response of both the Brewer and Dobson to ozone at large ozone slant paths. In addition, it affects the effective ozone absorption coefficients and extraterrestrial constants that are both instrument-dependent. This effect has not been taken into account in the calculation of ozone absorption coefficients that are currently recommended by WMO for the Dobson network. The ozone absorption coefficients are calculated for each Brewer instrument individually, but in the current procedure the effect of stray light is not considered. This study documents the error caused by the effect of stray light in the Brewer and Dobson total ozone measurements using a physical model for each instrument. For the first time, new ozone absorption coefficients are calculated for the Brewer and Dobson instruments, taking into account the stray light effect. The analyses show that the differences detected between the total ozone amounts deduced from Dobson AD and CD pair wavelengths are related to the level of stray light within the instrument. The discrepancy introduced by the assumption of a fixed height for the ozone layer for ozone measurements at high latitude sites is also evaluated. The ozone data collected by two Dobson instruments during the period of December 2008 to December 2014 are compared with ozone data from a collocated double monochromator Brewer spectrophotometer (Mark III). The results illustrate the dependence of Dobson AD and CD pair measurements on stray light.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".