MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4235026312 · doi:10.5194/acp-2019-645

Evaluation of a multi-model, multi-constituent assimilationframework for tropospheric chemical reanalysis

2019· preprint· en· W4235026312 on OpenAlexaff
Kazuyuki Miyazaki, K. W. Bowman, Keiya Yumimoto, Thomas Walker, Kengo Sudo

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsChemical transport modelData assimilationTroposphereAtmospheric sciencesTropospheric ozoneNOxOzoneClimatologyEnvironmental scienceNorthern HemisphereClimate modelAtmospheric chemistryTrace gasMeteorologyChemistryClimate changeGeographyCombustion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. We introduce a Multi-mOdel Multi-cOnstituent Chemical data assimilation (MOMO-Chem) framework that directly accounts for model error in transport and chemistry by integrating a portfolio of forward chemical transport models (GEOS-Chem, AGCM-CHASER, MIROC-Chem, MIROC-Chem-H) into a state-of-the-art ensemble Kalman filter data assimilation system that simultaneously optimizes both concentrations and emissions of multiple species through ingestion of a suite of measurements (ozone, NO2, CO, HNO3) from multiple satellite sensors. In spite of substantial model differences, the observational density and accuracy was sufficient for the assimilation to reduce the multi-model spread by 20–85 % for ozone, and annual mean bias by 39–97 % for ozone in the middle troposphere, while simultaneously reducing the tropospheric NO2 column biases by more than 40 %, and the negative biases of surface CO in the Northern Hemisphere by 41–94 %. For tropospheric mean OH, the multi-model mean meridional hemispheric gradient was reduced from 1.32 ± 0.03 to 1.19 ± 0.03, while the multi-model spread was reduced by 24–58 % over polluted areas. These improvements extended to emissions where uncertainty ranges in the a posteriori emissions due to model errors were quantified in 4–31 % for NOx and 13–35 % for CO regional emissions. Harnessing assimilation increments in both NOx and ozone, we show that the sensitivity of ozone and NO2 surface concentrations to NOx emissions varied by a factor of 2 for end-member models revealing fundamental differences in the representation of fast chemical and dynamical processes. Consequently, diagnostic information readily available from MOMO-Chem has the potential to improve chemical predictions through relationships such as emergent constraints.

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)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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