MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206493637 · doi:10.3390/rs14020371

Assimilation of GOSAT Methane in the Hemispheric CMAQ; Part I: Design of the Assimilation System

2022· article· en· W4206493637 on OpenAlexaff
Sina Voshtani, Richard Ménard, Thomas Walker, Amir Hakami

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData assimilationAssimilation (phonology)Kalman filterEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyEnsemble Kalman filterAdvectionMethaneComputer scienceAtmospheric sciencesMathematicsStatisticsExtended Kalman filterGeologyChemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a parametric Kalman filter data assimilation system using GOSAT methane observations within the hemispheric CMAQ model. The assimilation system produces forecasts and analyses of concentrations and explicitly computes its evolving error variance while remaining computationally competitive with other data assimilation schemes such as 4-dimensional variational (4D-Var) and ensemble Kalman filter (EnKF). The error variance in this system is advected using the native advection scheme of the CMAQ model and updated at each analysis while the error correlations are kept fixed. We discuss extensions to the CMAQ model to include methane transport and emissions (both anthropogenic and natural) and perform a bias correction for the GOSAT observations. The results using synthetic observations show that the analysis error and analysis increments follow the advective flow while conserving the information content (i.e., total variance). We also demonstrate that the vertical error correlation contributes to the inference of variables down to the surface. In a companion paper, we use this assimilation system to obtain optimal assimilation of GOSAT observations.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations15
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207