The importance of digital elevation model accuracy in X <sub> CO <sub>2</sub> </sub> retrievals: improving the Orbiting Carbon Observatory 2 Atmospheric Carbon Observations from Space version 11 retrieval product
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Knowledge of surface pressure is essential for calculating column-averaged dry-air mole fractions of trace gases, such as CO2 (XCO2). In the NASA Orbiting Carbon Observatory 2 (OCO-2) Atmospheric Carbon Observations from Space (ACOS) retrieval algorithm, the retrieved surface pressures have been found to have unacceptable errors, warranting a parametric bias correction. This correction depends on the difference between retrieved and a priori surface pressures, which are derived from a meteorological model that is hypsometrically adjusted to the surface elevation using a digital elevation model (DEM). As a result, the effectiveness of the OCO-2 bias correction is contingent upon the accuracy of the referenced DEM. Here, we investigate several different DEM datasets for use in the OCO-2 ACOS retrieval algorithm: the OCODEM used in ACOS v10 and previous versions, the NASADEM+ (a composite of SRTMv4, ASTER GDEMv3, GIMP, and RAMPv2 DEMs) used in ACOS v11, the Copernicus GLO-90 DEM (GLO-90 DEM), and two polar regional DEMs (ArcticDEM and REMA). We find that the NASADEM+ (ASTER GDEMv3) has a persistent negative bias on the order of 10 to 20 m across most regions north of 60° N latitude, relative to all the other DEMs considered (OCODEM, ArcticDEM, and GLO-90 DEM). Variations of 10 m in DEM elevations lead to variations in XCO2 of approximately 0.4 ppm, meaning that the XCO2 from OCO-2 ACOS v11 retrievals tends to be 0.4 to 0.8 ppm lower across regions north of 60° N than XCO2 from OCO-2 ACOS v10. Our analysis also suggests that the GLO-90 DEM has superior global continuity and accuracy compared to the other DEMs, motivating a post-processing update from OCO-2 v11 Lite files (which used NASADEM+) to OCO-2 v11.1 by substituting the GLO-90 DEM globally. We find that OCO-2 v11.1 improves accuracy and spatial continuity in the bias-corrected XCO2 product relative to both v10 and v11 in high-latitude regions while resulting in marginal or no change in most regions within ± 60° latitude. In addition, OCO-2 v11.1 provides increased data throughput after quality control filtering in most regions, partly due to the change in DEM but mostly due to other corrections to quality control parameters. Given large-scale differences north of 60° N between the OCODEM and NASADEM+, we find that replacing the OCODEM with NASADEM+ yields a ∼ 100 TgC shift in inferred carbon uptake for the zones spanning 30 to 60° N and 60 to 90° N, which is on the order of 5 % to 7 % of the estimated pan-Arctic land sink. Changes in inferred fluxes from replacing the OCODEM with the GLO-90 DEM are smaller, and given the evidence for improved accuracies from this DEM, this suggests that large changes in inferred fluxes from the NASADEM+ are likely erroneous.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".