Investigating water soluble organic aerosols: sources and evolution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An existing method for the measurement of atmospheric gaseous species was modified to collect data on aerosol concentrations. Data from biomass burning events in different regions (Canada, the Arctic and California) were collected during April to July, 2008 and the concentrations and evolution of secondary organic aerosols were discussed. And finally, data on the light absorbing properties of water soluble organic aerosols were collected in Atlanta, GA and compared with filter data for the same properties. The results presented in this thesis showed that a negative ion chemical ionization mass spectrometer (CIMS), can be modified by the addition of a thermally denuded inlet to measure aerosol phase sulfuric acid. This system can also be used to measure other aerosol phase organic acids. In the biomass burning plumes studied in the second part, no clear indication of formation of secondary aerosol or gaseous species was observed, except for peroxyacetyl nitrate (PAN). Filter data collected from FRM sites in the Southeastern U.S. showed that biomass burning is the most dominant source of water soluble light absorbing carbonaceous aerosol in this region. The data from a study in Atlanta, GA showed that the online PILS-LWCC-WSOC system might be used for measurements of light absorbing properties of aerosols and WSOC.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".