Effect of assimilating CO2 observations in the Korean Peninsula on the inverse modeling to estimate surface CO2 flux over Asia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To investigate the impact of two CO2 observation datasets obtained from the Korean Peninsula on the surface CO2 flux estimation over Asia, the two datasets are assimilated into the CarbonTracker (CT) inverse modeling system and the estimated surface CO2 fluxes are analyzed. Anmyeon-do (AMY) and Gosan (GSN) sites in the Korean Peninsula have observed surface CO2 mole fraction since the late 1990s. To investigate the effect of assimilating the additional Korean observations on the surface CO2 flux estimation over Asia, two experiments are conducted. The reference experiment (CNTL) only assimilates observations provided by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), while the other experiment (EXP1) assimilates both NOAA observations and two Korean observation datasets. The results are analyzed for 9 years from 2003 to 2011 in Asia region because both AMY and GSN datasets exist almost completely for this period. The annual average of estimated biosphere CO2 flux of EXP1 shows more flux absorption in summer and less flux emission from fall to spring compared to CNTL, mainly on Eurasia Temperate and Eurasia Boreal regions. When comparing model results to independent CO2 concentration data from surface stations and aircraft, the root mean square error is smaller for EXP1 than CNTL. The EXP1 yields more reduction on uncertainty of estimated biosphere CO2 flux over Asia, and the observation impact of AMY, GSN sites on flux estimation is approximately 11%, which is greater than other observation sites around the world. Therefore, the two CO2 observation sets in the Korean Peninsula are useful in reducing uncertainties for regional as well as global scale CO2 flux estimation.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".