Quantifying Emissions from Fugitive Area Sources Using a Hybrid Method of Multi-Path Optical Remote Sensing and Tomographic Inverse-Dispersion Techniques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reducing methane (CH4) emissions from anthropogenic activities is critical to climate change mitigation efforts. However, there is still considerable uncertainty over the amount of fugitive CH4 emissions due to large-scale area sources and heterogeneous emission distributions. To reduce the uncertainty and improve the spatial and temporal resolutions, a new hybrid method was developed combining optical remote sensing (ORS), computed tomography (CT), and inverse-dispersion modeling techniques on the basis of which a multi-path scanning system was developed. It uses a horizontal radial plume mapping path configuration and adapts a Lagrangian stochastic dispersion mode into CT reconstruction. The emission map is finally calculated by using a minimal curvature tomographic reconstruction algorithm, which introduces smooth constraints at each pixel. Two controlled-release experiments of CH4 were conducted with different configurations, showing relative errors of only 2% and 3%. Compared with results from the single-path inverse-dispersion method (5–175%), the new method can not only derive the emission distribution but also obtain a more accurate emission rate. The outcome of this research would bring broad application of the ORS-CT and inverse-dispersion techniques to other gases and sources.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".