the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
A full-coverage daily XCO2 dataset in China from 2015 to 2020 based on DSC-DF-LGB
Abstract. Carbon dioxide (CO2), as a major greenhouse gas, is one of the important causes of global warming. In recent years, the atmospheric CO2 concentration in China has been increasing year by year. Satellite observation is the main means of obtaining atmospheric CO2 concentration. However, the current onboard sensors used for measuring atmospheric CO2 have a narrow observation range and cannot obtain spatiotemporal continuous atmospheric CO2 concentrations. Therefore, this paper proposes a daily full-coverage XCO2 dataset generation method based on the DSC-DF-LGB (Deep Separable Convolutional Neural Network and Deep Forest concatenated with LightGBM) model to obtain the spatiotemporal distribution of atmospheric CO2 in China. The DSC-DF-LGB model was established to train the mapping relationship between OCO-2 XCO2 retrieval and related variables (reanalysis XCO2, vegetation parameters, human factors, elevation, and meteorological parameters). The model was used to generate a daily 0.1° full-coverage XCO2 dataset for China from 2015 to 2020. The cross validation (CV) result indicates that the model has strong performance in estimating XCO2, with R2 and RMSE of 0.9633 and 0.9761 ppm. The TCCON independent site validation result indicates that the estimated XCO2 has high consistency with in-situ measurements, with R2 and RMSE of 0.8786 and 1.5452 ppm. The full-coverage and high-resolution XCO2 dataset can provide data support for research on carbon sources and sinks. The dataset is available at https://zenodo.org/doi/10.5281/zenodo.12696674 (Huang, 2024).
- Preprint
(2344 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 26 Feb 2025)
-
RC1: 'Comment on essd-2024-371', Anonymous Referee #1, 29 Nov 2024
reply
Using satellite observations, reanalysis data, and other auxiliary variables to produce spatiotemporally continuous XCO2 data is meaningful for carbon cycle studies. This paper employs the DSC-DF-LGB model to generate daily XCO2 data for China from 2015 to 2020 based on the OCO-2 XCO2. Cross-validation and independent site validation both demonstrate that the generated dataset is highly accurate. However, the novelty of this paper seems insufficient for the ESSD journal, as there has been a considerable amount of research in this area recently, generating many similar datasets. So, where exactly does this paper contribute? Is it in achieving higher accuracy for the dataset, or is the proposed method significantly different from existing studies? I do not recommend this paper for publication in ESSD, and here are some major concerns:
1. What is the contribution of this paper compared to existing studies and datasets? Machine learning methods have increasingly been used for XCO2 reconstruction, and there is no substantial difference in accuracy. The daily XCO2 data produced here does not generate new insights, nor is it compared with existing datasets. From a scientific perspective, I believe the novelty of this paper is insufficient.
2. Regarding the DSC-DF-LGB method proposed in the paper, the advantages of combining DF and LGB are not well demonstrated. Does it perform better than a single model in terms of accuracy? Additionally, the role and meaning of DSC are unclear. It seems to only be used for feature extraction, but it’s not clear why it needs to be involved in the training process.
3. The results in Section 3.2 are surprising. XCO2 shows an increasing trend year by year, and theoretically, using machine learning to predict past or future XCO2 data will inevitably lead to some over- or under-estimations. However, the degree of error described in the paper seems exaggerated, especially given that the prediction period is only one year away from the model training period. Also, what is the purpose of this section in the paper? Does it imply that the DSC-DF-LGB method lacks generalization capability?
4. The analysis of the results lacks depth. For example, Figure 8 could benefit from more quantitative analysis, rather than just a simple qualitative comparison. In addition, Figure 9 presents the growth of concentrations, which has already been reported in many studies. Does this paper offer any new analysis or findings?
5. Just as I find the novelty of this paper lacking, the authors are also unclear in stating the motivation for their work. The last part of the introduction, which describes the problem or research objectives this paper aims to address, is vague and unclear. I suggest reorganizing this section.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-371-RC1
Data sets
Full-coverage daily 0.1° XCO2 in China Xinfeng Huang https://zenodo.org/doi/10.5281/zenodo.12696674
Model code and software
Full-coverage daily 0.1° XCO2 in China Xinfeng Huang https://zenodo.org/doi/10.5281/zenodo.12696674
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
287 | 71 | 11 | 369 | 7 | 9 |
- HTML: 287
- PDF: 71
- XML: 11
- Total: 369
- BibTeX: 7
- EndNote: 9
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1