MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4254939633 · doi:10.5194/acpd-12-25983-2012

Aerosol classification by airborne high spectral resolution lidar observations

2012· preprint· en· W4254939633 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Silke Groß, Michael Esselborn, Bernadett Weinzierl, Martin Wirth, Andreas Fix, Andreas Petzold

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric aerosols and clouds
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftEuropean Space Agency
KeywordsAerosolEnvironmental scienceLidarRemote sensingAtmosphere (unit)Biomass burningAtmospheric sciencesHigh resolutionMeteorologyGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. During four aircraft field experiments with the DLR research aircraft Falcon in 1998 (LACE), 2006 (SAMUM-1) and 2008 (SAMUM-2 and EUCAARI), airborne High Spectral Resolution Lidar (HSRL) and in situ measurements of aerosol microphysical and optical properties were performed. Altogether, the properties of six different aerosol types and aerosol mixtures – Saharan mineral dust, Saharan dust mixtures, Canadian biomass burning aerosol, African biomass burning aerosol, anthropogenic pollution aerosol, and marine aerosol have been studied. On the basis of this extensive HSRL data set, we present an aerosol classification scheme which is also capable to identify mixtures of different aerosol types. We calculated mixing lines that allowed us to determine the contributing aerosol types. The aerosol classification scheme was validated with in-situ measurements and backward trajectory analyses. Our results demonstrate that the developed aerosol mask is capable to identify complex stratifications with different aerosol types throughout the atmosphere.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.732
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.205 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAtmospheric aerosols and cloudsFrench-language works237,207