MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011089664 · doi:10.1029/2004jd005096

A comparative study of ozone production in five U.S. metropolitan areas

2005· article· en· W2011089664 on OpenAlexaff
L. I. Kleinman, P. H. Daum, Y.‐N. Lee, L. J. Nunnermacker, Stephen Springston, J. Weinstein‐Lloyd, J. Rudolph

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNational Eye Institute
KeywordsOzoneEnvironmental scienceAtmospheric sciencesIsopreneMetropolitan areaMeteorologyChemistryGeographyPhysicsOrganic chemistryArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present observations of O3 and O3 precursors measured at mid boundary layer altitude during field campaigns in Nashville, Tennessee (1995), New York City, New York (1996), Phoenix, Arizona (1998), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (1999), and Houston, Texas (2000). Ozone production rates P(O3) and their sensitivity to NOx and volatile organic carbons (VOCs) are calculated using observed concentrations as inputs to a steady state box model. City to city comparisons are made to illustrate common features of urban photochemistry and features that are unique to specific cities. Ozone production rates vary from nearly zero to 155 ppb h−1. Differences in P(O3) depend on precursor concentrations, namely, radical sources, NOx and VOCs. Under conditions where P(O3) is greater than 25 ppb h−1, there is a potential to produce enough same‐day O3 to transform a typical regional background into a severe O3 episode. Six such cases were observed, in Nashville, Philadelphia, and Houston, with elevated O3 concentrations in the afternoon (130–211 ppb) following a morning in which P(O3) was 25–140 ppb h−1. High P(O3) occurs when NOx concentrations are 5–25 ppb and OH‐VOC reactivity is above 5 s−1. These conditions are infrequent, and aside from a common dependence on calm winds, reasons vary from city to city. In Nashville, high P(O3) was observed during a stagnation event over downtown and under the circumstance that an air mass with a high concentration of isoprene encountered a NOx source. In Houston, NOx and light olefins are coemitted from petrochemical facilities leading to the highest P(O3)s of the five cities studied. High values of P(O3) did not occur in Phoenix because of low radical production, caused mainly by a dry atmosphere, and a low VOC to NOx ratio. The sensitivity of P(O3) to its precursors varied from NOx limited in rural samples to VOC limited near emission sources. In Philadelphia, and especially Phoenix, the highest O3 production rates occurred under VOC‐limited conditions. In Nashville, New York City, and Houston the high‐P(O3) samples were near the ridge line where P(O3) responds somewhat to VOC reductions but is insensitive to NOx changes.

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 score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.164

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations154
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207