MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077650774 · doi:10.1029/2003gl017861

High aerosol optical depth biomass burning events: A comparison of optical properties for different source regions

2003· article· en· W2077650774 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric aerosols and clouds
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAERONETAerosolSingle-scattering albedoSmokeEnvironmental scienceOptical depthAtmospheric sciencesAlbedo (alchemy)Effective radiusCombustionBorealBiomass (ecology)PeatTaigaScatteringMeteorologyGeologyOpticsChemistryPhysicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The optical properties of aerosols such as smoke from biomass burning vary due to aging processes and these particles reach larger sizes at high concentrations. We compare the spectra of aerosol optical depth (τ a ), column‐integrated volume size distributions, refractive indices, and single scattering albedo retrieved from AERONET observations for four selected events of very high smoke optical depth (τ a ∼ 2 at 500 nm). Two case studies are from tropical biomass burning regions (Brazil and Zambia) and two are cases of boreal forest and peat fire smoke transported long distances to sites in the US and Moldova. Smoke properties for these extreme events can be significantly different from those reported in more typical plumes. In particular, large differences in smoke fine mode particle radius (∼0.17 to 0.25 μm) and single scattering albedo (∼0.88 to 0.99 at 440 nm) were observed as a result of differences in fuels burned, combustion phase, and aging.

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.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.169
Threshold uncertainty score0.648

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.257 · 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