MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006683097 · doi:10.1029/2005jd006200

Reconciliation of coarse mode sea‐salt aerosol particle size measurements and parameterizations at a subtropical ocean receptor site

2006· article· en· W2006683097 on OpenAlexaff
Jeffrey S. Reid, Barbara Brooks, Katie K. Crahan, D́ean A. Hegg, T. F. Eck, N. T. O’Neill, Gerrit de Leeuw, Elizabeth A. Reid, Kenneth D. Anderson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric aerosols and clouds
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersBrookhaven National LaboratoryOffice of Naval ResearchUniversity of Leeds
KeywordsAerosolEnvironmental scienceAtmospheric sciencesSpectrometerSea saltSingle-scattering albedoMeteorologyPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In August/September of 2001, the R/P FLIP and CIRPAS Twin Otter research aircraft were deployed to the eastern coast of Oahu, Hawaii, as part of the Rough Evaporation Duct (RED) experiment. Goals included the study of the air/sea exchange, turbulence, and sea‐salt aerosol particle characteristics at the subtropical marine Pacific site. Here we examine coarse mode particle size distributions. Similar to what has been shown for airborne dust, optical particle counters such as the Forward Scattering Spectrometer Probe (FSSP), Classical Scattering Aerosol Spectrometer Probe (CSASP) and the Cloud Aerosol Spectrometer (CAS) within the Cloud Aerosol and Precipitation Spectrometer (CAPS) instrument systematically overestimate particle size, and consequently volume, for sea salt particles. Ground‐based aerodynamic particle sizers (APS) and AERONET inversions yield much more reasonable results. A wing pod mounted APS gave mixed results and may not be appropriate for marine boundary layer studies. Relating our findings to previous studies does much to explain the bulk of the differences in the literature and leads us to conclude that the largest uncertainty facing flux and airborne cloud/aerosol interaction studies is likely due to the instrumentation itself. To our knowledge, there does not exist an in situ aircraft system that adequately measures the ambient volume distribution of coarse mode sea salt particles. Most empirically based sea salt flux parameterizations can trace their heritage to a clearly biased measurement technique. The current “state of the art” in this field prevents any true form of clear sky radiative “closure” for clean marine environments.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.168
Threshold uncertainty score0.943

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations105
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicAtmospheric aerosols and cloudsFrench-language works237,207