The potential role of background ozone on current and emerging air issues: An overview
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is now widely recognized that background ozone may form a significant part of the concentration and, thus, of the health and ecosystem impacts, experienced at many locations. This can be extremely important, as the background concentration is the level below which concentrations cannot be reduced by local efforts alone. In discussing background ozone, it is important to be clear what is meant by the term. Slightly different interpretations of the exact understanding of what constitutes background widen the uncertainty in reported values. Nevertheless, the central tendency to reported background ozone concentrations may be estimated as 25 to 40 ppb for measurements made worldwide. The large majority of recently reported work indicates that these background concentrations are increasing at a rate ranging up to about 0.3 to 0.5 ppb per year. Ozone lifted to levels above the boundary layer can be transported very long (intercontinental) distances. As a result, Asia, North America, and Europe can all contribute to each other’s background ozone concentrations. In this context, the rapid industrial growth in Asia and the expected accompanying increased precursor emissions, could prove to be significant.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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 it