Characterization of aerosol and cloud water at a mountain site during WACS 2010: secondary organic aerosol formation through oxidative cloud processing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. The water-soluble fractions of aerosol filter samples and cloud water collected during the Whistler Aerosol and Cloud Study (WACS 2010) were analyzed using an Aerodyne aerosol mass spectrometer (AMS). This is the first study to report AMS organic spectra of re-aerosolized cloud water, and to make direct comparison between the AMS spectra of cloud water and aerosol samples collected at the same location. In general, the mass spectra of aerosol were very similar to those of less volatile cloud organics. By using a photochemical reactor to oxidize both aerosol filter extracts and cloud water, we find evidence that fragmentation of water-soluble organics in aerosol increases their volatility during photochemical oxidation. By contrast, enhancement of AMS-measurable organic mass by up to 30% was observed during the initial stage of oxidation of cloud water organics, which was followed by a decline at the later stages of oxidation. These observations are in support of the general hypothesis that cloud water oxidation is a viable route for SOA formation. In particular, we propose that additional SOA material was produced by functionalizing dissolved organics via OH oxidation, where these dissolved organics are sufficiently volatile that they are not usually part of the aerosol. This work demonstrates that water-soluble organic compounds of intermediate volatility (IVOC), such as cis-pinonic acid, produced via gas-phase oxidation of monoterpenes, can be important aqueous-phase SOA precursors in a biogenic-rich environment.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".