MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Total Carbon Column Observing Network's GGG2020 Data Version: Data Quality, Comparison with GGG2014, and Future Outlook

2025· article· en· W6923360649 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueCaltech Library · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSociology and Education Studies
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColumn (typography)A priori and a posterioriCarbon fibersWork (physics)Carbon fluxData set

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New atmospheric gas retrievals using the GGG2020 version of the Total Carbon Column Observing Network (TCCON) dataset are significantly improved compared with the previous GGG2014 data version. The GGG2020 retrievals have lower variability across the network, better spectral fits, and smaller biases. The exception to this is XCH4 , which is, on average across the network, 5.3 ppb lower in GGG2020 than in GGG2014, a difference we mostly attribute to the a priori profiles used to perform the scaling. We discuss the remaining biases and corrections, the TCCON approach of identifying, quantifying, and minimizing biases, and suggest future work to further minimize the biases. The GGG2020 TCCON data are available from the TCCON archive at http://tccondata.org.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.497
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designNot applicable
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 venueCaltech LibrarySame topicSociology and Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207