MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987969549 · doi:10.1021/es0111941

Dynamic Oxidation of Gaseous Mercury in the Arctic Troposphere at Polar Sunrise

2002· article· en· W1987969549 on OpenAlexaff
S. E. Lindberg, Steve Brooks, Che‐Jen Lin, Karen J. Scott, Matthew S. Landis, Robert K. Stevens, Andreas Richter

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSunriseTroposphereMercury (programming language)ArcticEnvironmental chemistryBiogeochemical cyclePolar nightOzonePolarSnowpackAtmospheric sciencesElemental mercuryEnvironmental scienceOzone depletionChemistryAtmospheric chemistrySnowOceanographyMeteorologyFlue gasGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gaseous elemental mercury (Hg0) is a globally distributed air toxin with a long atmospheric residence time. Any process that reduces its atmospheric lifetime increases its potential accumulation in the biosphere. Our data from Barrow, AK, at 71 degrees N show that rapid, photochemically driven oxidation of boundary-layer Hg0 after polar sunrise, probably by reactive halogens, creates a rapidly depositing species of oxidized gaseous mercury in the remote Arctic troposphere at concentrations in excess of 900 pg m(-3). This mercury accumulates in the snowpack during polar spring at an accelerated rate in a form that is bioavailable to bacteria and is released with snowmelt during the summer emergence of the Arctic ecosystem. Evidence suggests that this is a recent phenomenon that may be occurring throughout the earth's polar regions.

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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations587
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicMercury impact and mitigation studiesFrench-language works237,207