MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1963343144 · doi:10.1002/2015jd023769

Relative contributions of gaseous oxidized mercury and fine and coarse particle‐bound mercury to mercury wet deposition at nine monitoring sites in North America

2015· article· en· W1963343144 on OpenAlexaff
Irene Cheng, Leiming Zhang, Huiting Mao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsMercury (programming language)ScavengingEnvironmental chemistryMERCUREChemistrySnowDeposition (geology)Environmental scienceElemental mercuryAerosolMeteorologyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)GeologyGeographyAdsorption

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Relative contributions to mercury wet deposition by gaseous oxidized mercury (%GOM) and fine and coarse particle‐bound mercury (%FPBM and %CPBM) were estimated making use of monitored FPBM air concentration and mercury wet deposition at nine North American locations. Scavenging ratios of particulate inorganic ions (K+ and Ca2+, Mg2+ and Na+) were used as a surrogate for those of FPBM and CPBM, respectively. FPBM and CPBM were estimated to contribute 8–36% and 5–27%, respectively, depending on the location, to total wet deposition. The rest of the 39–87% was attributed to the contribution of GOM. The average %GOM, %FPBM and %CPBM among all locations were 65%, 17%, and 18%, respectively. The relative distributions of %GOM, %FPBM, and %CPBM were influenced by Hg(II) gas‐particle partitioning, urban site characteristics, and precipitation type. At the regional scale, %GOM dominated over %FPBM and %CPBM. However, the sum of FPBM and CPBM contributed to nearly half of the total Hg wet deposition in urban areas, which was greater than other site categories and is attributed to higher FPBM air concentrations. At four locations, %FPBM exceeded %GOM during winter in contrast to summer, suggesting the efficient snow scavenging of aerosols. The results from this study are useful in improving mercury transport models since most of these models do not estimate CPBM, but frequently use monitored mercury wet deposition data for model evaluation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.892
Threshold uncertainty score0.214

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations13
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres→Same topicAir Quality and Health Impacts→French-language works237,207→