MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083988711 · doi:10.5194/acp-13-8365-2013

Recommendations for reporting "black carbon" measurements

2013· article· en· W2083988711 on OpenAlexaff
Andreas Petzold, J. A. Ogren, Markus Fiebig, Paolo Laj, Shao‐Meng Li, U. Baltensperger, Thomas Popp, Stefan Kinne, Gelsomina Pappalardo, Nobuo Sugimoto, Christoph Wehrli, Alfred Wiedensohler, X.-Y. Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric chemistry and physics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersBrookhaven National LaboratoryForschungszentrum Jülich
KeywordsTerminologyAmbiguityBlack seaCarbon blackClimate changeKey (lock)Environmental scienceComputer scienceChemistryLinguisticsGeologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Although black carbon (BC) is one of the key atmospheric particulate components driving climate change and air quality, there is no agreement on the terminology that considers all aspects of specific properties, definitions, measurement methods, and related uncertainties. As a result, there is much ambiguity in the scientific literature of measurements and numerical models that refer to BC with different names and based on different properties of the particles, with no clear definition of the terms. The authors present here a recommended terminology to clarify the terms used for BC in atmospheric research, with the goal of establishing unambiguous links between terms, targeted material properties and associated measurement techniques.

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)0.095
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.305
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.905
Threshold uncertainty score0.504

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0950.305
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.005
Bibliometrics0.0170.014
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0090.008
Open science0.0100.005
Research integrity0.0130.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.029

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.204 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainReporting
GenreMethods

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

Citations1,197
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmospheric chemistry and physicsSame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207