MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036036726 · doi:10.1029/2000gl012568

Ice nucleation in NH<sub>4</sub>HSO<sub>4</sub>, NH<sub>4</sub>NO<sub>3</sub>, and H<sub>2</sub>SO<sub>4</sub> aqueous particles: Implications for cirrus cloud formation

2001· article· en· W2036036726 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel J. Cziczo, Jonathan P. D. Abbatt

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupercoolingNucleationAqueous solutionIce nucleusCirrusSulfateAerosolAmmonium sulfateMaterials scienceAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChemistryThermodynamicsPhysical chemistryMeteorologyChromatographyOrganic chemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The temperature at which ice nucleation occurs in aqueous NH4HSO4, NH4NO3, and H2SO4 particles has been studied as a function of solute concentration. The onset of freezing was determined using FTIR extinction spectroscopy coupled to a low‐temperature flow tube system. The greatest supercooling with respect to equilibrium freezing was observed for H2SO4/H2O. Considerably less supercooling was observed for NH4NO3/H2O, and less yet for the NH4HSO4/H2O system. All three aerosol types exhibit a lower freezing temperature, as a function of solute concentration, than (NH4)2SO4 particles previously studied by this approach. These results suggest that air masses containing ammoniated sulfate particles will promote cirrus cloud formation at higher temperatures and lower relative humidities than will those containing pure H2SO4 particles.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations33
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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