MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098844080 · doi:10.1029/2011gl047890

Biomass burning emission estimates inferred from satellite column measurements of HCHO: Sensitivity to co-emitted aerosol and injection height

2011· article· en· W2098844080 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Siegfried Gonzi, Paul I. Palmer, M. P. Barkley, Isabelle De Smedt, Michel Van Roozendaël

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UK
KeywordsSCIAMACHYAerosolEnvironmental scienceAtmospheric sciencesNorthern HemisphereBorealSulfate aerosolAlbedo (alchemy)Single-scattering albedoMixing ratioClimatologyMeteorologyTroposphereGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

[1] We infer monthly regional biomass burning emissions of formaldehyde (HCHO) during 2006 from space-borne column measurements of HCHO from the SCIAMACHY instrument over Canada, boreal Asia, South America, southern Africa, and Indonesia. We remove the influence of biogenic volatile organic compounds using an offline chemical mechanism. We quantify the sensitivity of our emission estimates to aerosol single scattering albedo, ω, indicative of fresh (ω = 0.8) and aged (ω > 0.9) aerosol, and the relative vertical distribution of the aerosol and HCHO, both which compromise the interpretation of space-based HCHO columns. For our control calculation we assume freshly-emitted gases and aerosols that are mainly confined to the boundary layer. Associated posterior emissions are generally lower than the prior emissions except over Canada and boreal Asia during northern hemisphere summer months. Accounting for faster vertical mixing results in posterior emissions 20%–100% higher than the corresponding control calculation, and consequently more consistent with the prior. Assuming an aged aerosol generally results in a 20% decrease in posterior emissions relative to prior values. Based on the range of posterior estimates from our sensitivity analyses, not accounting for uncertainties associated with the underlying gas-phase and heterogeneous chemistry, we estimate HCHO emission uncertainties are typically 20%–30% but can be up to 300% in extreme cases.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.077
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.221 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations54
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207