Soluble, light-absorbing species in snow at Barrow, Alaska
Bibliographic record
Abstract
[1] As part of the international multidisciplinary Ocean - Atmosphere - Sea Ice - Snowpack (OASIS) program we analyzed more than 500 terrestrial (melted) snow samples near Barrow, AK between February and April 2009 for light absorption, as well as H2O2 and inorganic anion concentrations. For light absorption in the photochemically active region (300–450 nm) of surface snows, H2O2 and NO3− make minor contributions (combined < 9% typically), while HUmic LIke Substances (HULIS) and unknown chromophores each account for approximately half of the total absorption. We have identified four main sources for our residual chromophores (i.e., species other than H2O2 or NO3−): (1) vegetation and organic debris impact mostly the lowest 20 cm of the snowpack, (2) marine inputs, which are identified by high Cl− and SO42− contents, (3) deposition of diamond dust to surface snow, and (4) gas-phase exchange between the atmosphere and surface snow layers. The snow surfaces, and accompanying chromophore concentrations, are strongly modulated by winds and snowfall at Barrow. However, even with these physical controls on light absorption, we see an overall decline of light absorption in near-surface snow during the 7 weeks of our campaign, likely due to photo-bleaching of chromophores. While HULIS and unknown chromophores dominate light absorption by soluble species in Barrow snow, we know little about the photochemistry of these species, and thus we as a community are probably overlooking many snowpack photochemical reactions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".