MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387614619 · doi:10.1525/elementa.2022.00025

Using Regionalized Air Quality Model Performance and Bayesian Maximum Entropy data fusion to map global surface ozone concentration

2023· article· en· W4387614619 on OpenAlexaff
Jacob S. Becker, Marissa N. DeLang, Kai‐Lan Chang, Marc L. Serre, Owen R. Cooper, Hantao Wang, Martin G. Schultz, Sabine Schröder, Xiao Lu, Lin Zhang, Makoto Deushi, Béatrice Josse, Christoph A. Keller, Jean‐François Lamarque, Meiyun Lin, Virginie Marécal, Sarah A. Strode, Kengo Sudo, Simone Tilmes, Li Zhang, Michael Bräuer, J. Jason West

Bibliographic record

VenueElementa Science of the Anthropocene · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceAir quality indexBayesian probabilityClassification of discontinuitiesWeightingOzoneMeteorologyAtmospheric sciencesRange (aeronautics)StatisticsMathematicsGeographyGeologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Estimates of ground-level ozone concentrations have been improved through data fusion of observations and atmospheric chemistry models. Our previous global ozone estimates for the Global Burden of Disease study corrected for bias uniformly across continents and then corrected near monitoring stations using the Bayesian Maximum Entropy (BME) framework for data fusion. Here, we use the Regionalized Air Quality Model Performance (RAMP) framework to correct model bias over a much larger spatial range than BME can, accounting for the spatial inhomogeneity of bias and nonlinearity as a function of modeled ozone. RAMP bias correction is applied to a composite of 9 global chemistry-climate models, based on the nearest set of monitors. These estimates are then fused with observations using BME, which matches observations at measurement stations, with the influence of observations declining with distance in space and time. We create global ozone maps for each year from 1990 to 2017 at fine spatial resolution. RAMP is shown to create unrealistic discontinuities due to the spatial clustering of ozone monitors, which we overcome by applying a weighting for RAMP based on the number of monitors nearby. Incorporating RAMP before BME has little effect on model performance near stations, but strongly increases R2 by 0.15 at locations farther from stations, shown through a checkerboard cross-validation. Corrections to estimates differ based on location in space and time, confirming heterogeneity. We quantify the likelihood of exceeding selected ozone levels, finding that parts of the Middle East, India, and China are most likely to exceed 55 parts per billion (ppb) in 2017. About 96% of the global population was exposed to ozone levels above the World Health Organization guideline of 60 µg m−3 (30 ppb) in 2017. Our annual fine-resolution ozone estimates may be useful for several applications including epidemiology and assessments of impacts on health, agriculture, and ecosystems.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.129
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElementa Science of the AnthropoceneSame topicAir Quality and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207