Evidence for Asian dust effects from aerosol plume measurements during INTEX-B 2006 near Whistler, BC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Several cases of aerosol plumes resulting from trans-Pacific transport were observed between 2 km and 5.3 km at Whistler, BC from 22 April 2006 to 15 May 2006. The fine particle (<1 μm) chemical composition of most of the plumes was dominated by sulphate that ranged from 1–5 μg m−3 as measured with a Quadrapole Aerosol Mass Spectrometer (Q-AMS). Coarse particles (>1 μm) were enhanced in all sulphate plumes. Fine particle organic mass concentrations were relatively low in most plumes and were nominally anti-correlated with the increases in the number concentrations of coarse particles. The ion chemistry of coarse particles sampled at Whistler Peak was dominated by calcium, sodium, nitrate, sulphate and formate. Scanning transmission X-ray microscopy of coarse particles sampled from the NCAR C-130 aircraft relatively close to Whistler indicated carbonate, potassium and organic functional groups, in particular the carboxyl group. Asian plumes reaching Whistler, BC during the INTEX-B study were not only significantly reduced of fine particle organic material, but organic compounds were attached to coarse particles in significant quantities. Suspension of dust with deposited organic material and scavenging of organic materials by dust near anthropogenic sources are suggested, and if any secondary organic aerosol (SOA) was formed during transport from Asian source regions across the Pacific it was principally associated with the coarse particles. An average of profiles indicates that trans-Pacific transport between 2 and 5 km during this period increased ozone by about 10 ppbv and fine particle sulphate by 0.2–0.5 μg m−3. The mean sizes of the fine particles in the sulphate plumes were larger when dust particles were present and smaller when the fine particle organic mass concentration was larger and dust was absent. The coarse particles of dust act to accumulate sulphate, nitrate and organic material in larger particles, diminishing the role of these compounds in indirect radiative forcing, but potentially enhancing their roles in direct radiative forcing.
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 | 0.001 | 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".