IASI carbon monoxide validation over the Arctic during POLARCAT spring and summer campaigns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. In this paper, we provide a detailed comparison between carbon monoxide (CO) data measured by the Infrared Atmospheric Sounding Interferometer (IASI)/METOP and aircraft measurements over the Arctic. The CO measurements were obtained during North American campaigns (NASA ARCTAS and NOAA ARCPAC) and European campaigns (POLARCAT-France, POLARCAT-GRACE and YAK-AEROSIB) as part of the International Polar Year (IPY) in spring and summer 2008. During the campaigns different air masses were sampled including clean air, polluted plumes originating from anthropogenic sources in Europe, Asia and North America, and forest fire plumes originating from Siberia and Canada. CO-rich plumes following different transport pathways were captured well by the IASI instrument, illustrated for example by a transport event over the North Pole from Asia on 9 July 2008. The comparison between the IASI CO profiles and aircraft data was achieved by first completing the latter for higher altitudes using a latitudinally dependent climatology of ACE-FTS satellite CO profiles (2004–2009) and by subsequently smoothing the resulting full profiles by the IASI averaging kernels. Proceeding this way, the IASI profiles were shown to be in good agreement with smoothed in situ profiles (with a difference of about 10 ppbv) in spring. In summer, the IASI profiles were higher than the smoothed in situ profiles below 8 km, for all polluted cases. Correlations between IASI and combination ACE-FTS/aircraft derived total columns varied from 0.15 to 0.74 in spring and 0.26 to 0.84 in summer, with better results over the sea in spring (0.73) and over the land in summer (0.69).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".