MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4407860793 · doi:10.5194/amt-2024-180-ac2

Reply on RC2

2025· peer-review· en· W4407860793 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ramina Alwarda

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepeer-review
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicClinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The purpose of this work is to derive new NO2 vertical profiling data products from Pandora spectrometers and investigate the factors contributing to the bias of this dataset relative to established ground-based and spaceborne datasets. Possible applications of the NO2 vertical profile dataset include air quality monitoring and satellite validation studies. We explore the application of the optimal estimation method to Pandora multi-axis differential optical absorption spectroscopy (MAX-DOAS) measurements to retrieve vertical profile information for nitrogen dioxide (NO2). We use the Heidelberg Profile (HeiPro) retrieval algorithm to derive, for the first time, NO2 profiles and partial columns (0–4 km) from Pandora MAX-DOAS measurements from 2018–2020 at Downsview, a suburban neighbourhood in the north end of Toronto, Canada that is subject to local traffic emissions and urban influences. Validation of the new dataset was done via comparison with official Pandora direct-Sun measurements, in situ observations, satellite data, and an air quality forecasting model. We find that, for tropospheric partial column comparisons, the HeiPro dataset has a positive mean relative bias to Pandora direct-Sun (61 % ± 9.7 %) and TROPOMI (41 % ± 47 %) observations, as well as the GEM-MACH model output (61 % ± 7.5 %), with similar seasonal and diurnal cycles in the bias with Pandora direct-Sun and GEM-MACH. Contributing factors to the large bias of HeiPro to Pandora direct-Sun were investigated, and NO2 heterogeneity, combined with differences between direct-Sun and multi-axis viewing geometries, was found to contribute a maximum of 52 % of the total relative bias during morning measurement times. For surface NO2 comparisons, we find that HeiPro measurements capture the magnitude and diurnal variability of surface NO2 reasonably well (mean relative bias to in situ surface NO2: −8.9 % ± 7.6 %) but are low-biased compared to GEM-MACH (mean relative bias: −36 % ± 2.4 %). Compared to HeiPro, the GEM-MACH model profiles are high-biased in the lower boundary layer and low-biased in the free troposphere.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.780
Threshold uncertainty score0.735

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0230.019
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2200.161

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicClinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology→French-language works237,207→