MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019074087 · doi:10.1029/2008gl036467

A decade of dust: Asian dust and springtime aerosol load in the U.S. Pacific Northwest

2009· article· en· W2019074087 on OpenAlexaff
Emily V. Fischer, N. Christina Hsu, Daniel A. Jaffe, Myeong-Jae Jeong, Sunling Gong

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAerosolAsian DustEnvironmental scienceSeaWiFSAtmospheric sciencesPrecipitationClimatologyMineral dustMeteorologyGeographyGeologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We integrate SeaWiFS aerosol optical thickness (AOT) over the Taklamakan and Gobi Deserts with U.S. aerosol observations to study surface aerosol variability in the Northwest U.S. in relation to Asian dust emissions. The results indicate that ∼50% of the interannual variability in springtime average PM 2.5 and PM 10 can be explained by changes in Asian dust emissions. On a seasonal timescale, variations in dust emissions appear to be more important in determining the total material crossing the Pacific than the variations in meteorology represented by the PNA or the LRT3 indices. We are able to explain ∼80% of the interannual variability using three variables: AOT, a transport index, and regional precipitation. This suggests that a strong source, favorable transport and sufficient residence time are needed for Asian dust to have a maximum seasonal impact in the Northwest. The results contextualize case studies and demonstrate the utility of the Deep Blue algorithm.

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)0.000
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 score0.412
Threshold uncertainty score0.357

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations73
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207