MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7117537766 · doi:10.55225/sti.697

NASA’s role in monitoring stratospheric ozone. Are ozone layer protection measures effective?

2025· article· W7117537766 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Agnieszka Lisowska-Lis

Bibliographic record

VenueScience Technology and Innovation · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOzoneOzone layerMontreal ProtocolOzone depletionStratosphereNitrogen oxides

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The stratospheric ozone layer (10–50 km) absorbs biologically harmful ultravioletradiation, enabling life to persist on Earth. Early NASA measurements from the1960s–1970s showed that natural ozone levels are controlled by trace nitrogen oxides,hydrogen oxides, and halogens. Approximately 20 NASA missions, together withNOAA, ESA, and other international partners, have contributed to global ozone monitoring.Observations revealed a severe springtime ozone depletion over Antarcticain 1984–1985. NASA recorded the lowest ozone value ever measured over the SouthPole—73 DU on September 30, 1994—and the largest single-day ozone hole extent of29.9 · 10⁶ km² on September 9, 2000. The Montreal Protocol (1987) led to a 99% phaseoutof regulated ozone-depleting substances. According to the latest WMO/UNEP assessment,the ozone layer is projected to return to 1980 levels by approximately 2066over Antarctica, 2045 over the Arctic, and 2040 globally, assuming current controlsremain in place. Although episodic deep ozone depletion occurred in 2023, NASA’s2025 data show continued long-term recovery. In 2025, the minimum Antarctic ozoneconcentration was 147 DU on October 6, and the maximum ozone hole extent was23 · 10⁶ km² on September 9—the largest ever recorded hole was about 30% bigger.These observations confirm that Montreal Protocol regulations are driving the gradualrestoration of the ozone layer.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScience Technology and Innovation→Same topicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate→French-language works237,207→