MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3128444750 · doi:10.5194/amt-2020-470-cc2

One more nc-related qestion on amt-2020-470

2021· peer-review· en· W3128444750 on OpenAlexafffund
Daniel Zawada, Ghislain Franssens, Robert Loughman, Antti Mikkonen, Alexei Rozanov, Claudia Emde, Adam Bourassa, Seth Dueck, Hannakaisa Lindqvist, Didier Ramon, В. В. Розанов, Emmanuel Dekemper, Erkki Kyrölä, John P. Burrows, D. Fussen, D. A. Degenstein

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepeer-review
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersUniversität BremenAcademy of FinlandNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationEuropean Space AgencyFreie Hansestadt BremenCanadian Space AgencyNuclear Safety and Security CommissionDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsRadiative transferRefractionScatteringSpan (engineering)Monte Carlo methodScalar (mathematics)TangentOpticsPhysicsPolarization (electrochemistry)Computational physicsWavelengthMathematicsGeometryStatisticsChemistryEngineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. A comprehensive inter-comparison of seven radiative transfer models in the limb scattering geometry has been performed. Every model is capable of accounting for polarization within a spherical atmosphere. Three models (GSLS, SASKTRAN-HR, and SCIATRAN) are deterministic, and four models (MYSTIC, SASKTRAN-MC, Siro, and SMART-G) are statistical using the Monte Carlo technique. A wide variety of test cases encompassing different atmospheric conditions, solar geometries, wavelengths, tangent altitudes, and Lambertian surface reflectances have been defined and executed for every model. For the majority of conditions it was found that the models agree to better than 0.2 % in the single-scatter test cases and better than 1 % in the scalar and vectorial test cases with multiple scattering included, with some larger differences noted at high values of surface reflectance. For the first time in limb geometry, the effect of atmospheric refraction was compared among four models that support it (GSLS, SASKTRAN-HR, SCIATRAN, and SMART-G). Differences among most models with multiple scattering and refraction enabled were less than 1 %, with larger differences observed for some models. Overall the agreement among the models with and without refraction is better than has been previously reported in both scalar and vectorial modes.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.761
Threshold uncertainty score0.798

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2390.120

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.233 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate→French-language works237,207→