Reactive Uptake of Ozone by Chlorophyll at Aqueous Surfaces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report the results of two complementary studies of the heterogeneous reaction between gas-phase ozone and aqueous chlorophyll. In the first experiment, the chlorophyll is present at the air-water interface and its concentration is measured as a function of time, using laser-induced fluorescence, to obtain the surface kinetics. Under most experimental conditions, these are well described using a Langmuir-Hinshelwood formalism. The second experiment was carried out in a wetted-wall flowtube apparatus and measured the uptake coefficient of ozone by the chlorophyll solution. The uptake coefficient decreases with increasing ozone concentration, consistent with the surface mechanism found in the fluorescence experiment. The two experiments agree that the uptake coefficient for ozone by such chlorophyll samples is approximately 2-5 x 10(-6) with unpolluted boundary layer ozone concentrations. At low wind speed, the reaction between ozone and chlorophyll at the sea surface may represent the driving force for ozone deposition at the ocean surface, significantly increasing its deposition velocity there.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".