Development and evaluation of a sampling system to determine gaseous Mercury fluxes using an aerodynamic micrometeorological gradient method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An aerodynamic gradient micrometeorological approach to the measurement of total gaseous mercury (TGM) flux has been developed. This method has been applied in many field studies for the characterization of TGM flux from various mercuriferous substrates. The resolution of the gradient method depends on the sampling systems characteristics and has been demonstrated to be on the order of 0.01 ± 0.01 ng Hg m −3 or better. The method is best suited to measuring high‐emitting sites such as studied here. The TGM flux resolution is based on the gradient resolution and depends on the site characteristics and the atmospheric condition. For a typical friction velocity u * of 0.1 m s −1 and gradient intake heights of 0.15 and 0.4 m the method can resolve a TGM flux on the order of 1.5 ng m −2 h −1 . The system can be configured for two‐level or multilevel sampling, as needed. The method compares well with other micrometeorological methods as demonstrated during the Nevada storms intercomparison study. The micrometeorological method is shown to compare well with chamber techniques under comparable conditions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".