MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996873734 · doi:10.1021/es800291w

Modeling Dynamic Exchange of Gaseous Elemental Mercury at Polar Sunrise

2008· article· en· W1996873734 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMercury (programming language)SunriseSnowMERCUREEnvironmental scienceElemental mercuryAtmospheric sciencesPolarAtmospheric chemistryMeteorologyEnvironmental chemistryChemistryOzoneAdsorptionGeologyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Geography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At polar sunrise, gaseous elemental mercury (GEM) undergoes an exceptional dynamic exchange in the air and at the snow surface during which GEM can be rapidly removed from the atmosphere (the so-called atmospheric mercury depletion events (AMDEs)) as well as re-emitted from the snow within a few hours to days in the Polar Regions. Although high concentrations of total mercury in snow following AMDEs is well documented, there is very little data available on the redox transformation processes of mercury in the snow and the fluxes of mercury at the air/snow interface. Therefore, the net gain of mercury in the Polar Regions as a result of AMDEs is still an open question. We developed a new version of the global mercury model, GRAHM, which includes for the first time bidirectional surface exchange of GEM in Polar Regions in spring and summer by developing schemes for mercury halogen oxidation, deposition, and re-emission. Also for the first time, GOME satellite data-derived boundary layer concentrations of BrO have been used in a global mercury model for representation of halogen mercury chemistry. Comparison of model simulated and measured atmospheric concentrations of GEM at Alert, Canada, for 3 years (2002-2004) shows the model's capability in simulating the rapid cycling of mercury during and after AMDEs. Brooks et al. (1) measured mercury deposition, reemission, and net surface gain fluxes of mercury at Barrow, AK, during an intensive measurement campaign for a 2 week period in spring (March 25 to April 7, 2003). They reported 1.7, 1.0 +/- 0.2, and 0.7 +/- 0.2 microg m(-2) deposition, re-emission, and net surface gain, respectively. Using the optimal configuration of the model, we estimated 1.8 microg m(-2) deposition, 1.0 microg m(-2) re-emission, and 0.8 microg m(-2) net surface gain of mercury for the same time period at Barrow. The estimated net annual accumulation of mercury within the Arctic Circle north of 66.5 degrees is approximately 174 t with +/-7 t of interannual variability for 2002-2004 using the optimal configuration. We estimated the uncertainty of the model results to the Hg/Br reaction rate coefficient to be approximately 6%. Springtime is clearly demonstrated as the most active period of mercury exchanges and net surface gain (approximately 46% of annual accumulation) in the Arctic.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.224 · 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