MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3165951392 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu21-11379

Aerosol classification using sun photometer and lidar data within a machine learning algorithm-a possible nowcasting application

2021· article· en· W3165951392 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joelle Buxmann, Martin J. Osborne, Mike Protts, Debbie O’Sullivan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric aerosols and clouds
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAngstrom exponentAERONETAerosolLidarSun photometerEnvironmental scienceAlgorithmRemote sensingMeteorologySingle-scattering albedoComputer scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Met Office operates a ground based operational network of nine polarisation Raman lidars (aerosol profiling instruments) and sun photometers (column integrated information). An aerosol classification scheme using supervised machine learning has been developed. The concept of Mahalanobis (~normalized) distance to identify the aerosol type from individual Aerosol Robotic Network (AERONET) measurements including Extinction Angstrom Exponent, Absorption Angstrom Exponent, Single Scattering Albedo and Index of refraction is used for a subset of AERONET stations around the globe of known main aerosol types (training set). The aerosol types include maritime, urban industrial, biomass burning and dust. We build a predictive model from this training set using K nearest neighbour machine learning algorithms. The relation of particle polarisation ratio and lidar ratio from the Raman lidar is used as a sanity check. We apply the model to 3- 4 years of AERONET and profiling data across the UK, with instruments evenly distributed across the country, from Camborne in Cornwall to Lerwick in the Shetland Islands. We are showing more detailed data of a dust event in May 2016, dust/biomass burning aerosol mix from October 2017 (hurricane Ophelia) and more recent aerosol transported from the Canadian wild fires in September 2020. AERONET Level 2.0 data is compared to level 1.5 in order to determine the implications for the aerosol classification. Level 1.5 data are cloud-screened, but not quality assured and may not have the final calibration applied. Level 2.0 data have pre- and post-field calibration applied, are cloud-screened, and quality-assured data. As level 2.0 data is usually only available after 1-2 years (after a new calibration has been performed), it is important to understand the usefulness of more readily available level 1.5 (cloud screened) data. The aim is to build a real time aerosol classification application that can be used in Nowcasting.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAtmospheric aerosols and clouds→French-language works237,207→