MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Aerosol Laser Ablation Mass Spectrometry of Suspended Powders from PM Sources and Its Implications to Receptor Modeling

2002· article· en· W2061148029 on OpenAlexafffund
Phillip V. Tan, Michael S. Fila, Greg J. Evans, Robert E. Jervis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Air & Waste Management Association · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersHealth CanadaUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsAerosolFly ashParticulatesParticle (ecology)Environmental chemistryMass spectrometryCombustionChemistryMass spectrumCoalCoal combustion productsMineralogyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Environmental scienceGeologyChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Primary sources of particulate matter (PM) were analyzed by suspending powdered samples into an aerosol laser ablation mass spectrometer (LAMS). PM sources studied included vehicle exhaust particulates, dust from a non-ferrous smelter, cement powder, incinerator fly ash, two coal fly ash samples, and two soils. Marker peaks signified certain PM source sectors: construction particles could be distinguished by abundant Ca and Ca compounds, fuel combustion was marked by elemental carbon clusters, and nonferrous industrial particles showed inorganic As, Cu, Pb, Zn, and SOx. In addition to the distinction between particles from these different source sectors, mass spectral results also showed that for a single source, different particle types existed, and among different sources within a sector, similar spectra were present. The aerosol LAMS results show the difficulty in differentiating among separate fly ash sources as well as among different soil samples. A particle class balance receptor model that measures the amount of specific particle types rather than the amount of a chemical component is suggested as a means of source apportionment when particle spectra with overlapping source possibilities occur. The assumptions and limitations of receptor modeling aerosol LAMS data are also described. In particular, methods need to be developed to account for the contribution of secondary sources.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score0.562

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations16
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Air & Waste Management AssociationSame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207