Intelligent pointing increases the fraction of cloud-free CO2 and CH4 observations from space
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For most CO 2 and CH 4 satellites, only a small percentage (∼10%) of observations yield successful retrievals, with the remaining ∼90% rejected, primarily due to the effects of clouds. Discarding this large fraction of data is an inefficient strategy worth reconsidering due to the costs involved in developing, launching and operating the satellites to make these observations. However, if real-time cloud data are available together with pointing capability, cloud data can guide the instrument pointing in an “intelligent pointing” strategy for cloud avoidance. In this work, multiple intelligent pointing simulations were conducted, demonstrating the significant advantages of this approach for satellites in a highly elliptical orbit (HEO), from which nearly the whole Earth disk can be observed. Multiple factors are shown to contribute to intelligent pointing efficiency such as the size and shape (or aspect ratio) of the field of view (FOV). For the current baseline orbit and Imaging Fourier Transform Spectrometer (IFTS) observing characteristics for the proposed Arctic Observing Mission (AOM), the monthly fraction of cloud-free observations is roughly a factor of 2 (ranging from ∼1.5–2.5) more than obtained with standard pointing (in which cloud information is not used). A similar efficiency is expected in a geostationary orbit (GEO) with an IFTS, however, for a dispersive instrument in HEO or GEO, the gain is more modest. This result is primarily attributed to the ∼1:1 aspect ratio of the IFTS FOV, since it is more efficient for cloud avoidance and scanning irregularly-shaped land masses than the long and narrow slit projection of a typical dispersive spectrometer. These results have implications for the design of future CO 2 or CH 4 monitoring satellites and constellation architectures, as well as other fields of satellite earth observation in which clouds significantly impact observations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".