A Comparative Analysis of Satellite‐Derived CO Retrievals During the 2020 Wildfires in North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In September 2020, the Western United States experienced anomalously severe wildfires that resulted in carbon monoxide (CO) emissions almost three times the 2001-2019 average. In this study, we investigate the influence of wildfires on atmospheric carbon monoxide (CO) variability through a comparative analysis of observations from the Measurements of Pollution in the Troposphere (MOPITT), the Infrared Atmospheric Sounding Interferometer (IASI), and the Tropospheric Monitoring Instrument (TROPOMI). Our focus is on the North American domain, aiming to understand the differences among these products. In general, all instruments show excellent agreement under typical atmospheric CO conditions. However, notable discrepancies were observed in the CO data from the three sensors, particularly in regions with elevated CO total column (TC) values. IASI and TROPOMI consistently showed higher CO values over the western U.S. compared to MOPITT. During the fire episodes, we found that the IASI retrievals suggested higher CO abundances near the surface than the MOPITT thermal infrared retrievals that are probably the result of the differences in the covariance matrices used in IASI and MOPITT retrievals. We also found that the high IASI and TROPOMI CO observations over the western U.S. coincided with high values of the TROPOMI aerosol index (AI), suggesting the presence of absorbing aerosols. The analysis exhibited better agreement between TROPOMI and MOPITT CO TC when the AI values were low. Our results suggest that appropriate quality filtering should be employed when analyzing pollution events with these data. In particular, utilizing the AI for quality filtering may be useful when analyzing extreme pollution events with these satellite products.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".