MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407723260 · doi:10.31223/x54q65

PoMELO Passive Blind Test Results: Emissions detection and quantification

2025· preprint· en· W4407723260 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Thomas E. Barchyn, M. A. Clements, Tyler Gough, Chris H. Hugenholtz, Abbey Munn, Clay Wearmouth, Coleman Vollrath

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality Monitoring and Forecasting
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTest (biology)Environmental scienceComputer scienceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PoMELO Passive is a technology that combines vehicle-based pollution measurements from public roads with cloud-based software to: (i) detect emissions from oil and gas sites, and (ii) quantify emissions rates. Automated attribution and plume modeling algorithms provide results with little human intervention, facilitating large scale monitoring programs. PoMELO Passive is operationally deployed at the University of Calgary as part of its pan-Canadian methane monitoring program. To evaluate performance, the system underwent a blind test program assessing detection and quantification performance. Tests were administered by the Alberta Methane Emissions Program (AMEP) at the Carbon Management Canada Newell County Test Facility, near Brooks, Alberta, Canada from 23-27 September 2024. Tests were conducted in a blind configuration where release rates were blind to the University of Calgary. Detections and quantifications were produced by the Passive system, then reported to AMEP. Finally, real release rates were un-blinded, facilitating analysis and reporting. Localization performance was not evaluated. Release rates varied from 0.0 g/s to 2.49 g/s CH4 and were metered with a mass flow controller prior to release from a single stack. A total of 190 independent single-release, single-pass experiments were performed. Detection results indicate that PoMELO Passive effectively detected 60% to 85% of the releases < 1 g/s, and 88% to 100% of the releases > 1 g/s. There were no false positive detections. Non-detects primarily occurred in situations with low wind speeds (< 3 m/s), suggesting detection was modulated by environmental conditions. Quantification results were assessed at the single- and multi-pass scales to simulate opportunistic and targeted sampling. Single-pass quantification results had little systematic bias, but some variability (linear model slope = 0.927, r2 = 0.70). Replicates of individual release rates were aggregated to assess quantification improvement with averaging multiple plume passes. Multi-pass results similarly had little systematic bias, but less variability (linear model slope = 1.05, r2 = 0.95). Broadly, PoMELO Passive can produce high quality data in a low-cost and highly scalable deployment model. However, data users require effective tools to carefully manage uncertainty and make full use of data in assimilation and analysis systems.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.916
Threshold uncertainty score0.599

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAir Quality Monitoring and ForecastingFrench-language works237,207