Discrepancies in the Simulated Global Terrestrial Latent Heat Flux from GLASS and MERRA-2 Surface Net Radiation Products
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Surface all-wave net radiation (Rn) is a crucial variable driving many terrestrial latent heat (LE) models that estimate global LE. However, the differences between different Rn products and their impact on global LE estimates still remain unclear. In this study, we evaluated two Rn products, Global LAnd Surface Satellite (GLASS) beta version Rn and Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications-version 2 (MERRA-2) Rn, from 2007–2017 using ground-measured data from 240 globally distributed in-situ radiation measurements provided by FLUXNET projects. The GLASS Rn product had higher accuracy (R2 increased by 0.04–0.26, and RMSE decreased by 2–13.3 W/m2) than the MERRA-2 Rn product for all land cover types on a daily scale, and the two Rn products differed greatly in spatial distribution and variations. We then determined the resulting discrepancies in simulated annual global LE using a simple averaging model by merging five diagnostic LE models: RS-PM model, SW model, PT-JPL model, MS-PT model, and SIM model. The validation results showed that the estimated LE from the GLASS Rn had higher accuracy (R2 increased by 0.04–0.14, and RMSE decreased by 3–8.4 W/m2) than that from the MERRA-2 Rn for different land cover types at daily scale. Importantly, the mean annual global terrestrial LE from GLASS Rn was 2.1% lower than that from the MERRA-2 Rn. Our study showed that large differences in satellite and reanalysis Rn products could lead to substantial uncertainties in estimating global terrestrial LE.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".