MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4321492694 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu23-2304

Insights on methane emissions using GHGSat’s constellation

2023· preprint· en· W4321492694 on OpenAlexaff
Mathias Strupler, Marianne Girard, Dylan Jervis, Jean-Phillipe MacLean, David B. Marshall, Jason McKeever, Antoine Ramier, D. R. Young

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsGHGSat (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstellationSatellite constellationMethaneEnvironmental scienceSatelliteRemote sensingComputer scienceScale (ratio)Measure (data warehouse)MeteorologyGeographyAerospace engineeringEngineeringPhysicsData miningCartographyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In May 2022, GHGSat added 3 satellites to its growing methane monitoring constellation, bringing the total to 5 commercial satellites now in operation. Each satellite has a detection threshold of about 100 kg/h and a 25 meters spatial resolution, enabling them to attribute industrial emissions to individual facilities. With its constellation, GHGSat can measure any site in the world with a repeatable methodology multiple times per year, giving a unique view of localized methane emissions on a global scale. This presentation will focus on the insights that can be obtained from aggregate industrial methane emissions data measured by the GHGSat constellation. Example use cases ranging from local to global monitoring will be presented. In addition, we will discuss the constellation’s imaging capabilities and current methane measurement accuracy. Finally, an update on the next phase of the constellation will be given.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics→French-language works237,207→