Assessing the Surface Downward Longwave Irradiance Models Using ERA5 Input Data in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Longwave radiation (LR) is one of the energy balance components responsible for warming and cooling water during hot summers. Both downward incoming LR, emitted by the atmosphere, and outgoing LR emitted by the land surface are not widely measured. The influence of clouds on the LR heat budget makes it even harder to establish reliable formulations for all-sky conditions. This paper uses air temperature and cloud cover from the ERA5 reanalysis database to compare 20 models for the downward longwave irradiance (DLI) at Earth’s surface and compare them with ERA5’s DLI product. Our work uses long-time continuous DLI measured data at three stations over Canada, and ERA5 reanalysis, a reliable source for data-scarce regions, such as central British Columbia (Canada). The results show the feasibility of the local calibration of different formulations using ERA5 reanalysis data for all-sky conditions with RMSE metrics ranging from 37.1 to 267.3 W m −2 , which is comparable with ERA5 reanalysis data and can easily be applied at broader scales by implementing it into hydrological models. Moreover, it is shown that ERA5 gridded data for DLI shows the best results with RMSE = 31.7 W m −2 . This higher performance suggests using ERA5 data directly as input data for hydrological and ecological models.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".