MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2912289277 · doi:10.1364/ao.58.001374

Improved ozone DIAL retrievals in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere using an optimal estimation method

2019· article· en· W2912289277 on OpenAlexafffund
Ghazal Farhani, R. J. Sica, Sophie Godin‐Beekmann, G. Ancellet, Alexander Haefele

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Optics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique
KeywordsStratosphereTroposphereEnvironmental scienceLidarOzoneDialAltitude (triangle)Tropospheric ozoneAtmospheric sciencesRemote sensingMeteorologyGeologyPhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have implemented a first-principle optimal estimation method to retrieve ozone density profiles using simultaneously tropospheric and stratospheric differential absorption lidar (DIAL) measurements. Our retrieval extends from 2.5 km to about 42 km in altitude, and in the upper troposphere and the lower stratosphere (UTLS) it shows a significant improvement in the overlapping region, where the optimal estimation method (OEM) can retrieve a single ozone profile consistent with the measurements from both lidars. Here stratospheric and tropospheric measurements from the Observatoire de Haute Provence are used, and the OEM retrievals in the UTLS region compared with coincident ozonesonde measurements. The retrieved ozone profiles have a small statistical uncertainty in the UTLS region relative to individual determinations of ozone from each lidar, and the maximum statistical uncertainty does not exceed a maximum of 7%.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied OpticsSame topicAtmospheric Ozone and ClimateFrench-language works237,207