MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377013770 · doi:10.1175/jtech-d-22-0131.1

A CO2 and H2O Gas Analyzer with Reduced Error due to Platform Motion

2023· article· en· W4377013770 on OpenAlexaff
Doug Vandemark, Marc Emond, S. D. Miller, Shawn Shellito, Ivan Bogoev, Jason Covert

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
Canadian institutionsCampbell Scientific (Canada)
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBuoySpectrum analyzerEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingNoise (video)Gas analyzerFlux (metallurgy)Computer scienceAcousticsMarine engineeringMaterials scienceGeologyPhysicsEngineeringTelecommunicationsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract One long-standing technical problem affecting the accuracy of eddy correlation air–sea CO2 flux estimates has been motion contamination of the CO2 mixing-ratio measurement. This sensor-related problem is well known but its source remains unresolved. This report details an attempt to identify and reduce motion-induced error and to improve the infrared gas analyzer (IRGA) design. The key finding is that a large fraction of the motion sensitivity is associated with the detection approach common to most closed- and open-path IRGA employed today for CO2 and H2O measurements. A new prototype sensor was developed to both investigate and remedy the issue. Results in laboratory and deep-water tank tests show marked improvement. The prototype shows a factor of 4–10 reduction in CO2 error under typical at-sea buoy pitch and roll tilts in comparison with an off-the-shelf IRGA system. A similar noise reduction factor of 2–8 is observed in water vapor measurements. The range of platform tilt motion testing also helps to document motion-induced error characteristics of standard analyzers. Study implications are discussed including findings relevant to past field measurements and the promise for improved future flux measurements using similarly modified IRGA on moving ocean observing and aircraft platforms.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Atmospheric and Oceanic TechnologySame topicOceanographic and Atmospheric ProcessesFrench-language works237,207