MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2883309417 · doi:10.5194/amt-12-271-2019

A calibration procedure which accounts for non-linearity in single-monochromator Brewer ozone spectrophotometer measurements

2019· article· en· W2883309417 on OpenAlexaff
Zahra Vaziri Zanjani, Omid Moeini, D. Barton, Vladimir Savastiouk

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric measurement techniques · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStray lightMonochromatorOzoneCalibrationLinearityOpticsObservatoryEnvironmental scienceWavelengthRemote sensingPhysicsMeteorologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. It is now known that single-monochromator Brewer spectrophotometer ozone and sulfur dioxide measurements suffer from non-linearity at large ozone slant column amounts due to the presence of instrumental stray light caused by scattering within the optics of the instrument. Because of the large gradient in the ozone absorption spectrum in the near-ultraviolet, the atmospheric spectra measured by the instrument possess a very large gradient in intensity in the 300 to 325 nm wavelength region. This results in a significant sensitivity to stray light when there is more than 1000 Dobson units (DU) of ozone in the light path. As the light path (air mass) through ozone increases, the stray-light effect on the measurements also increases. The measurements can be of the order of 10 %, low for an ozone column of 600 DU and an air mass factor of 3 (1800 DU slant column amount), which is an example of conditions that produce large slant column amounts. Primary calibrations for the Brewer instrument are carried out at Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii and Izana Observatory in Tenerife. They are done using the Langley plot method to extrapolate a set of measurements made under a constant ozone vertical column to an extraterrestrial calibration constant. Since the effects of a small non-linearity at moderate ozone paths may still be important, a better calibration procedure should account for the non-linearity of the instrument response. Studies involving the scanning of a laser source have been used to characterize the stray-light response of the Brewer (Fioletov et al., 2000), but until recently these data have not been used to elucidate the relationship between the stray-light response and the ozone measurement non-linearity. In a study done by Karppinen et al. (2015), a method for correcting stray light has been presented that uses an additive correction, which is determined via instrument slit characterization and a radiative transfer model simulation and is then applied to the single Brewer data (Karppinen et al., 2015). The European Brewer Network is also applying stray-light corrections, which includes an iterative process that results in correcting the single Brewer data to agree with double Brewer data (Rimmer et al., 2018; Redondas et al., 2018). The first model requires measurements of the slit function and the latter method relies on a calibrated instrument, such as a double Brewer, to characterize the instrument and to determine a correction for stray light. This paper presents a simple and practical method to correct for the effects of stray light, which includes a mathematical model of the instrument response and a non-linear retrieval approach that calculates the best values for the model parameters. The model can then be used in reverse to provide more accurate ozone values up to a defined maximum ozone slant path. The parameterization used was validated using an instrument physical model simulation. This model can be applied independently to any Brewer instrument and correct for the effects of 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.199
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.208 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmospheric measurement techniquesSame topicAtmospheric Ozone and ClimateFrench-language works237,207