Bias correction of OMI HCHO columns based on FTIR and aircraft measurements and impact on top-down emission estimates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spaceborne formaldehyde (HCHO) measurements constitute an excellent proxy for the sources of non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOCs). Past studies suggested substantial overestimations of NMVOC emissions in state-of-the-art inventories over major source regions. Here, the QA4ECV (Quality Assurance for Essential Climate Variables) retrieval of HCHO columns from OMI (Ozone Monitoring Instrument) is evaluated against (1) FTIR (Fourier-transform infrared) column observations at 26 stations worldwide and (2) aircraft in situ HCHO concentration measurements from campaigns conducted over the USA during 2012–2013. Both validation exercises show that OMI underestimates high columns and overestimates low columns. The linear regression of OMI and aircraft-based columns gives ΩOMI=0.651Ωairc+2.95×1015 molec.cm-2, with Ω OMI and Ω airc the OMI and aircraft-derived vertical columns, whereas the regression of OMI and FTIR data gives ΩOMI=0.659ΩFTIR+2.02×1015 molec.cm-2. Inverse modelling of NMVOC emissions with a global model based on OMI columns corrected for biases based on those relationships leads to much-improved agreement against FTIR data and HCHO concentrations from 11 aircraft campaigns. The optimized global isoprene emissions (∼445Tgyr-1) are 25 % higher than those obtained without bias correction. The optimized isoprene emissions bear both striking similarities and differences with recently published emissions based on spaceborne isoprene columns from the CrIS (Cross-track Infrared Sounder) sensor. Although the interannual variability of OMI HCHO columns is well understood over regions where biogenic emissions are dominant, and the HCHO trends over China and India clearly reflect anthropogenic emission changes, the observed HCHO decline over the southeastern USA remains imperfectly elucidated.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".