MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280548475 · doi:10.1021/acs.est.1c07121

Airborne Emission Rate Measurements Validate Remote Sensing Observations and Emission Inventories of Western U.S. Wildfires

2022· article· en· W4280548475 on OpenAlexaff
Chelsea E. Stockwell, M. M. Bela, Matthew M. Coggon, Georgios I. Gkatzelis, Elizabeth B. Wiggins, Emily Gargulinski, Taylor Shingler, Marta A. Fenn, Debora Griffin, Christopher D. Holmes, Xinxin Ye, Pablo E. Saide, Ilann Bourgeois, Jeff Peischl, Caroline C. Womack, R. A. Washenfelder, Patrick R. Veres, J. A. Neuman, J. B. Gilman, Aaron Lamplugh, Rebecca H. Schwantes, S. A. McKeen, Armin Wisthaler, Felix Piel, Hongyu Guo, Pedro Campuzano‐Jost, J. L. Jiménez, Alan Fried, T. F. Hanisco, L. G. Huey, A. E. Perring, Joseph M. Katich, Glenn S. Diskin, J. B. Nowak, T. P. Bui, Hannah S. Halliday, Joshua P. DiGangi, Gabriel Pereira, Eric James, Ravan Ahmadov, C. A. McLinden, A. J. Soja, Richard H. Moore, Johnathan W. Hair, C. Warneke

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationBundesministerium für Verkehr, Innovation und TechnologieCooperative Institute for Research in Environmental SciencesNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceAtmospheric sciencesPlumeAerosolSatelliteGreenhouse gasGeostationary Operational Environmental SatelliteTroposphereRemote sensingAir quality indexEmission inventoryMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Carbonaceous emissions from wildfires are a dynamic mixture of gases and particles that have important impacts on air quality and climate. Emissions that feed atmospheric models are estimated using burned area and fire radiative power (FRP) methods that rely on satellite products. These approaches show wide variability and have large uncertainties, and their accuracy is challenging to evaluate due to limited aircraft and ground measurements. Here, we present a novel method to estimate fire plume-integrated total carbon and speciated emission rates using a unique combination of lidar remote sensing aerosol extinction profiles and in situ measured carbon constituents. We show strong agreement between these aircraft-derived emission rates of total carbon and a detailed burned area-based inventory that distributes carbon emissions in time using Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite FRP observations (Fuel2Fire inventory, slope = 1.33 ± 0.04, r2 = 0.93, and RMSE = 0.27). Other more commonly used inventories strongly correlate with aircraft-derived emissions but have wide-ranging over- and under-predictions. A strong correlation is found between carbon monoxide emissions estimated in situ with those derived from the TROPOspheric Monitoring Instrument (TROPOMI) for five wildfires with coincident sampling windows (slope = 0.99 ± 0.18; bias = 28.5%). Smoke emission coefficients (g MJ–1) enable direct estimations of primary gas and aerosol emissions from satellite FRP observations, and we derive these values for many compounds emitted by temperate forest fuels, including several previously unreported species.

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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score0.849

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations61
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207