OZONE PRODUCTION IN THE PHILADELPHIA URBAN AREA DURING NE-OPS 99.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As part of the 1999 NARSTO Northeast Oxidant and Particulate Study (NE-OPS) field campaign, the DOE G-1 aircraft sampled trace gases and aerosols in and around the Philadelphia metropolitan area. Twenty research flights were conducted between July 25 and August 11. The overall goals of these flights were to obtain a mechanistic understanding of O{sub 3} production; to characterize the spatial and temporal behavior of photo-oxidants and aerosols; and to study the evolution of aerosol size distributions, including the process of new particle formation. Within the NE-OPS program, other groups provided additional trace gas, aerosol, and meteorological observations using aircraft, balloon, remote sensing, and surface based instruments (Phillbrick et al., 2000). In this article we provide an overview of the G-1 observations related to O{sub 3} production, focusing on the vertical distribution of pollutants. Ozone production rates are calculated using a box model that is constrained by observed trace gas concentrations. Highest O{sub 3} concentrations were observed on July 31, which we present as a case study. On that day, O{sub 3} concentrations above the 1-hour 120 ppb standard were observed downwind of Philadelphia and also in the plume of a single industrial facility located on the Delaware River south of the city.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".