MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415568553 · doi:10.1080/15481603.2025.2571244

Optimizing GAIN model to improve AOD imputation using MODIS MAIAC data and multi-source data fusion as an example

2025· article· en· W4415568553 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueGIScience & Remote Sensing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGoddard Space Flight CenterNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMissing dataImputation (statistics)Moderate-resolution imaging spectroradiometerMean squared errorLeverage (statistics)Data modelingData quality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aerosol Optical Depth (AOD) is a crucial parameter for monitoring air quality and studying atmosphere behavior, but satellite-based AOD measurements often suffer from significant gaps due to cloud cover and other obstructions. An imputation model is needed to address large-scale Missing Not At Random (MNAR) missingness with uncertainty quantification. Generative Adversarial Imputation Networks (GAIN) are particularly suited for handling MNAR missingness but remain unexplored for AOD imputation. In this study, we optimized the GAIN model to leverage its adversarial framework to achieve full coverage, preserve spatial variability, and enhance model generalizability. The model was tested using the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) Multi-Angle Implementation of Atmospheric Correction (MAIAC) dataset across the Northeastern United States. The revised GAIN model was trained and evaluated using data from 2021 to 2022, and 2023. The imputed dataset achieved full coverage, maintaining a consistent overall trend, with the imputed values capturing the broad spatial features seen in the original data. The model was validated against the in-situ AOD measurement from National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Aerosol Robotic Network (AERONET). A correlation coefficient (R) of 0.90 was achieved with an alignment between the imputed data and observed AOD values. When comparing to baseline imputation models such as MissForest, k-NN, and MICE, the GAIN model achieved a Mean Squared Error (MSE) of 0.04, a Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) of 0.17, a Mean Absolute Error (MAE) of 0.12, and a coefficient of determination (R²) of 0.84. Hyperparameter tuning of the revised GAIN model improved the R² to 0.94 and reduced overall error metrics. Using the 2023 Canadian wildfire example, the model successfully imputed AOD levels, capturing the sharp rise in aerosol concentrations where AOD levels exceeded 2.5 during June 6−7. This study provides a viable solution to missing values in satellite observation for improving AOD data coverage and enhancing the accuracy of follow-on air quality assessments and atmospheric studies.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.399
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.005
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.243 · 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