MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990412852 · doi:10.1029/2019jd032029

Improved Constraints on Northern Extratropical CO <sub>2</sub> Fluxes Obtained by Combining Surface‐Based and Space‐Based Atmospheric CO <sub>2</sub> Measurements

2020· article· en· W2990412852 on OpenAlexaff
Brendan Byrne, Junjie Liu, Meemong Lee, Ian Baker, K. W. Bowman, Nicholas M. Deutscher, Dietrich G. Feist, David Griffith, Laura T. Iraci, Matthäus Kiel, John S. Kimball, Charles E. Miller, Isamu Morino, Nicholas C. Parazoo, Christof Petri, Coleen M. Roehl, Mahesh Kumar Sha, Kimberly Strong, Voltaire A. Velazco, P. O. Wennberg, Debra Wunch

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersEuropean Space AgencyConnecticut Space Grant College ConsortiumJet Propulsion LaboratoryNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsFlux (metallurgy)Environmental scienceAtmospheric sciencesGreenhouse gasInversion (geology)Consistency (knowledge bases)Sampling (signal processing)MeteorologyMathematicsChemistryGeologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Top‐down estimates of CO 2 fluxes are typically constrained by either surface‐based or space‐based CO 2 observations. Both of these measurement types have spatial and temporal gaps in observational coverage that can lead to differences in inferred fluxes. Assimilating both surface‐based and space‐based measurements concurrently in a flux inversion framework improves observational coverage and reduces sampling related artifacts. This study examines the consistency of flux constraints provided by these different observations and the potential to combine them by performing a series of 6‐year (2010–2015) CO 2 flux inversions. Flux inversions are performed assimilating surface‐based measurements from the in situ and flask network, measurements from the Total Carbon Column Observing Network (TCCON), and space‐based measurements from the Greenhouse Gases Observing Satellite (GOSAT), or all three data sets combined. Combining the data sets results in more precise flux estimates for subcontinental regions relative to any of the data sets alone. Combining the data sets also improves the accuracy of the posterior fluxes, based on reduced root‐mean‐square differences between posterior flux‐simulated CO 2 and aircraft‐based CO 2 over midlatitude regions (0.33–0.56 ppm) in comparison to GOSAT (0.37–0.61 ppm), TCCON (0.50–0.68 ppm), or in situ and flask measurements (0.46–0.56 ppm) alone. These results suggest that surface‐based and GOSAT measurements give complementary constraints on CO 2 fluxes in the northern extratropics and can be combined in flux inversions to improve constraints on regional fluxes. This stands in contrast with many earlier attempts to combine these data sets and suggests that improvements in the NASA Atmospheric CO 2 Observations from Space (ACOS) retrieval algorithm have significantly improved the consistency of space‐based and surface‐based flux constraints.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 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

Citations71
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207