MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021861597 · doi:10.1029/2004gl020093

Long‐range transport of Siberian biomass burning emissions and impact on surface ozone in western North America

2004· article· en· W2021861597 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dan Jaffe, Isaac T. Bertschi, Lyatt Jaeglé, P. C. Novelli, Jeffrey S. Reid, Hiroshi Tanimoto, Roxanne Vingarzan, Douglas L. Westphal

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersOffice of Naval ResearchNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationHarvard UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceBiomass burningAir quality indexOzoneRange (aeronautics)Atmospheric sciencesAerosolClimatologyPollutantChemical transport modelAir pollutionBiomass (ecology)MeteorologyGeographyOceanographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the summer of 2003, biomass fires burned a large area of Siberia, the largest in at least 10 years. We used the NRL Aerosol Analysis and Prediction System (NAAPS) model to forecast the transport of the smoke from these fires. Transport of these airmasses to North America was confirmed by aircraft and surface observations. The fires resulted in enhancements in summer background CO and O 3 of 23–37 and 5–9 ppbv, respectively, at 10 sites in Alaska, Canada and the Pacific Northwest. From the area burned, we estimate that the Siberian fires generated 68 Tg of CO and 0.82 Tg of NO x (as N). In addition, we show that the background O 3 enhancement contributed to an exceedance of the ozone air quality standard in the Pacific Northwest. These results show that regional air quality and health are linked to global processes, including climate, forest fires and long‐range transport of pollutants.

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 score0.869
Threshold uncertainty score0.261

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations322
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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