MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413480341 · doi:10.3390/rs17172932

High-Resolution Inversion of GOSAT-2 Retrievals for Sectoral Methane Emission Estimates During 2019–2022: A Consistency Analysis with GOSAT Inversion

2025· article· en· W4413480341 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Rajesh Janardanan, Shamil Maksyutov, Fenjuan Wang, Lorna R. Nayagam, Yukio Yoshida, Xin Lan, Tsuneo Matsunaga

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSavannah River National LaboratoryLawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationUniversità degli Studi di Urbino Carlo BoNational Institute of Polar ResearchCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research OrganisationU.S. Department of CommerceNational Institute of Standards and TechnologyEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaLangley Research CenterNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsInversion (geology)Environmental scienceMethaneRemote sensingAtmospheric sciencesGeologyChemistrySeismology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We employed a global high-resolution inverse model to estimate sectoral methane emissions, integrating observations from the GOSAT-2 satellite for the first time, along with observations from the surface observation network. A similar set of inversions using GOSAT observations was carried out to evaluate the consistency between emissions estimates derived from these two satellites and to ensure that GOSAT-2 data could seamlessly integrate with the existing data series without disrupting the continuity of flux estimates. This analysis, covering the period from 2019 to 2022, utilized prior anthropogenic emissions data mainly from EDGAR v6 and incorporated additional natural sources and sinks as outlined by global methane budget, 2020. Our analysis reveals a general agreement between total methane emissions estimates from GOSAT and GOSAT-2. However, on a sectoral basis, we found notable regional differences in the flux estimates. While GOSAT inversion estimates ~8 Tg a−1 more anthropogenic emissions for China and around 4 Tg a−1 more wetland emissions for Brazil and Indonesia, the posterior error distribution suggests that GOSAT-2 inversion is closer to surface observations over Asia. These discrepancies are found in regions with significant differences in XCH4 data from the two satellites, such as East Asia and North America, tropical South America, and tropical Africa. These regional biases persist due to limited representative surface reference sites for Level 2 bias correction. The relatively lower data volume from GOSAT also introduces seasonal biases in the flux estimates when the quality filtering of Level 2 data persistently reduces usable observations during certain seasons, resulting in inadequate representation of the seasonal cycle in regions such as East Asia. Similarly, in tropical South America, where the model is relatively under-constrained by the limited surface observations, the lower data volume of GOSAT-2 suffers. While the two inversions exhibit consistent overall performance across North America and Europe, the GOSAT-2-based inversion demonstrates a better performance over East Asia. Therefore, while the two satellite datasets are broadly consistent, considering the fact that the biases in the XCH4 data overlap with regions under-constrained by surface observations, establishing additional surface reference measurement sites is desirable to ensure consistent inversion results.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.211 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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 venueRemote SensingSame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207