MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416853084 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-2025-4814

Intercomparison of Seven Collocated Ground-based Infrared Spectrometer Radiance Observations and Retrieved Thermodynamic Profiles

2025· article· W4416853084 on OpenAlexaff
David D. Turner, Bianca Adler, Laura Bianco, James M. Wilczak, Vincent Michaud-Belleau, Luc Rochette

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicCalibration and Measurement Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité TÉLUQActive Ethernet Passive Optical Networks Over λ MultipleXing (Canada)
FundersEarth System Research LaboratoriesNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationU.S. Department of Commerce
KeywordsRadianceCalibrationOpacityWater vaporInfraredThermodynamic temperatureTemperature measurementRadiosondeEmissivityRadiative transfer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Thermodynamic profiles, especially in the atmospheric boundary layer (ABL), are essential for many research and operational applications. Ground-based infrared spectrometers (IRS) are commercially available, and thermodynamic profiles in the ABL can be retrieved from these observations at 5-minute resolution or better. This study deployed seven IRS systems within 5 m of each other in Boulder, Colorado, USA, in September–October 2023, providing an opportunity to evaluate the relative accuracy of the measured radiances from these systems as well as the retrieved thermodynamic profiles. The analysis demonstrates that the observed radiances from the seven instruments agree within 1 % of the ambient radiance in both opaque and more transparent channels. The differences in the spectral calibration between the instruments were smaller than 0.11 cm-1, relative to the nominal effective wavenumber of the metrology laser of 15799 cm-1 (i.e., better than 7.1 ppm). Further, the retrieved temperature and humidity profiles agree with each other well within the uncertainty of the retrieved profiles, and qualities derived from these thermodynamic profiles such as precipitable water vapor and height of the convective boundary layer also agree within their uncertainties. These results demonstrate a high degree of repeatability and precision, and that if these instruments were deployed as part of a network, any differences larger than the retrieval uncertainty would be associated with real environmental differences and not an artifact of the instrument calibration or retrieval.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.662
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.218 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCalibration and Measurement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207