MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7097644072

From Raw Data to Television: How the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s AIRNow System Works

2015· article· en· W7097644072 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAir quality indexRaw dataDisseminationEnvironmental dataAir pollutionService (business)The InternetQuality (philosophy)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The United States (U.S.) Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) AIRNow program provides easy access to air quality information through the Internet (www.epa.gov/airnow). Real-time air quality data (ground-level ozone) are collected from over 1200 monitors across the U.S. and Canada. The data are processed and quality-controlled every hour at the Data Management Center (DMC) where ozone maps are produced. These maps show hourly formation and movement of ground-level ozone and are vividly colored to correspond to the Air Quality Index (AQI). Furthermore, files are transferred to various private weather service providers (WSPs) who, in turn, disseminate the data to the media (television, print, and Internet). In addition to ozone maps, the AIRNow web site collects and displays air quality forecasts provided by state and local air agencies for over 265 U.S. cities. These ozone maps and forecasts enable state and local governments to inform the public of possible health impacts and voluntary emission reduction programs. The AIRNow program is dynamic and currently expanding to include PM2.5 data, forecasts, and mapping products that will be publicly available in 2003.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.215

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0140.011
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0640.047

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 head0.215
Teacher spread0.162 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols→French-language works237,207→