Strong sensitivity of aerosol concentrations to convective wet scavenging parameterizations in a global model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. This study examines the influences of assumptions in convective wet scavenging parameterizations on global climate model simulations of aerosol concentrations and wet deposition. To facilitate this study, an explicit representation of the uptake of aerosol mass and number into convective cloud droplets and ice crystals by the processes of activation, collisions, freezing and evaporation is introduced into the ECHAM5-HAM model. This development replaces the prescribed aerosol cloud-droplet-borne/ice-crystal-borne fractions of the standard model. Relative to the standard model, the more consistent treatment between convective aerosol-cloud microphysical processes yields a reduction of aerosol wet removal in mixed liquid and ice phase convective clouds by at least a factor of two, and the global, annual mean aerosol burdens are increased by at least 20%. Two limiting cases regarding the wet scavenging of entrained aerosols are considered. In the first case, aerosols entering convective clouds at their bases are the only aerosols that are scavenged into cloud droplets, and are susceptible to removal by convective precipitation formation. In the second case, aerosols that are entrained into the cloud above the cloud base layer can activate, can collide with existing cloud droplets and ice crystals, and can subsequently be removed by precipitation formation. The limiting case that allows aerosols entrained above cloud base to become cloud-droplet-borne and ice-crystal-borne reduces the annual and global mean aerosol burdens by 30% relative to the other limiting case, and yields the closest agreement with global aerosol optical depth retrievals, and black carbon vertical profiles from aircraft campaigns (changes of about one order of magntiude in the upper troposphere). Predicted convective cloud droplet number concentrations are doubled in the tropical middle troposphere when aerosols entrained above cloud base are allowed to activate. These results show that aerosol concentrations and wet deposition predicted in a global model are strongly sensitive to the assumptions made regarding the wet scavenging of aerosols in convective clouds.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".