Seasonal and Diurnal Variations in Aerosol Concentration on Whistler Mountain: Boundary Layer Influence and Synoptic-Scale Controls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A mountain air chemistry observatory has been operational on the summit of Whistler Mountain in British Columbia, Canada, since 2002. A 1-yr dataset of condensation nuclei (CN) concentration from this site has been analyzed along with corresponding meteorological data to assess the frequency and patterns of influence from the planetary boundary layer (PBL). Characterization of air masses sampled from the site as either PBL influenced or representative of the free troposphere (FT) is important to subsequent analysis of the chemistry data. Median CN concentrations and seasonal trends were found to be comparable to other midlatitude mountain sites. Monthly median number concentrations ranged from 120 cm −3 in January to 1601 cm −3 in July. Using well-defined diurnal cycles in CN concentration as an indicator of air arriving from nearby valleys, PBL influence was found to occur on a majority of days during spring and summer and less frequently in late autumn and winter. Days with PBL influence were usually associated with synoptic-scale weather patterns that were conducive to convective mixing processes. Although more common in the warm season, vertical mixing capable of transporting valley air to the mountaintop also occurred in February during a period of high pressure aloft. In contrast, an August case study indicated that the more stable character of marine air masses can at times keep the PBL below the summit on summer days. Considerable variability in the synoptic-scale weather conditions at Whistler means that careful analysis of available datasets must be made to discriminate FT from PBL periods at the observatory.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".