A Modified Vegetation Photosynthesis and Respiration Model (VPRM) for the Eastern USA and Canada, Evaluated With Comparison to Atmospheric Observations and Other Biospheric Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Atmospheric CO 2 measurements from a dense surface network can help to evaluate terrestrial biosphere model (TBM) simulations of Net Ecosystem Exchange (NEE) with two key benefits. First, gridded CO 2 flux estimates can be evaluated over regional scales, not possible using flux tower observations at discrete locations for model evaluation. Second, TBM ability to explain atmospheric CO 2 fluctuations due to the biosphere can be directly tested, an important objective for anthropogenic emissions monitoring using atmospheric observations. Here, we customize the Vegetation Photosynthesis and Respiration Model (VPRM) for an eastern North American domain with strong biological activity upwind of urban areas. Parameters are optimized using flux tower observations from a historical database with sites in (and near) the domain. In addition, the respiration model (originally a linear function of temperature) is modified to account for impacts of changing foliage, non‐linear temperature, and water stress. Flux estimates from VPRM, the Carnegie‐Ames‐Stanford Approach (CASA) model and the Simple Biosphere Model v4 (SiB4), are convolved with footprints from atmospheric transport models for evaluation with CO 2 observations at 21 towers in the domain, with roughly half of the towers used here for the first time. Results show that the new respiration model in VPRM helps to correct a growing season sink bias in the atmosphere associated with underestimated summertime respiration using the original model with annual parameters. The new VPRM also better explains fine‐scale atmospheric CO 2 variability compared to other TBMs, due to higher resolution diagnostic phenology, the new respiration model, domain‐specific parameters, and high‐quality input data sets.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".