MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110493785 · doi:10.5194/acp-14-3427-2014

Chlorine as a primary radical: evaluation of methods to understand its role in initiation of oxidative cycles

2014· article· en· W2110493785 on OpenAlexafffund
Cora J. Young, R. A. Washenfelder, P. M. Edwards, D. D. Parrish, J. B. Gilman, W. C. Kuster, L. H. Mielke, Hans D. Osthoff, Catalina Tsai, O. Pikelnaya, J. Stutz, Patrick R. Veres, J. M. Roberts, Stephen M. Griffith, Sébastien Dusanter, P. S. Stevens, James Flynn, N. Grossberg, B. L. Lefer, J. S. Holloway, Jeff Peischl, T. B. Ryerson, E. Atlas, D. R. Blake, S. S. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric chemistry and physics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCalifornia Institute of TechnologyCalifornia Air Resources Board
KeywordsChlorineChemistryOzoneNOxEnvironmental chemistryPrimary (astronomy)Box modelHydroxyl radicalAir pollutionAtmospheric chemistryPollutionPhotochemistryMeteorologyRadicalOrganic chemistryCombustion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The role of chlorine atoms (Cl) in atmospheric oxidation has been traditionally thought to be limited to the marine boundary layer, where they are produced through heterogeneous reactions involving sea salt. However, recent observation of photolytic Cl precursors (ClNO2 and Cl2) formed from anthropogenic pollution has expanded the potential importance of Cl to include coastal and continental urban areas. Measurements of ClNO2 in Los Angeles during CalNex (California Nexus – Research at the Nexus of Air Quality and Climate Change) showed it to be an important primary (first generation) radical source. Evolution of ratios of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) has been proposed as a method to quantify Cl oxidation, but we find no evidence from this approach for a significant role of Cl oxidation in Los Angeles. We use a box model with the Master Chemical Mechanism (MCM v3.2) chemistry scheme, constrained by observations in Los Angeles, to examine the Cl sensitivity of commonly used VOC ratios as a function of NOx and secondary radical production. Model results indicate VOC tracer ratios could not detect the influence of Cl unless the ratio of [OH] to [Cl] was less than 200 for at least a day. However, the model results also show that secondary (second generation) OH production resulting from Cl oxidation of VOCs is strongly influenced by NOx, and that this effect obscures the importance of Cl as a primary oxidant. Calculated concentrations of Cl showed a maximum in mid-morning due to a photolytic source from ClNO2 and loss primarily to reactions with VOCs. The [OH] to [Cl] ratio was below 200 for approximately 3 h in the morning, but Cl oxidation was not evident from the measured ratios of VOCs. Instead, model simulations show that secondary OH production causes VOC ratio evolution to follow that expected for OH oxidation, despite the significant input of primary Cl from ClNO2 photolysis in the morning. Even though OH is by far the dominant oxidant in Los Angeles, Cl atoms do play an important role in photochemistry there, constituting 9% of the primary radical source. Furthermore, Cl–VOC reactivity differs from that of OH, being more than an order of magnitude larger and dominated by VOCs, such as alkanes, that are less reactive toward OH. Primary Cl is also slightly more effective as a radical source than primary OH due to its greater propensity to initiate radical propagation chains via VOC reactions relative to chain termination via reaction with nitrogen oxides.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations167
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmospheric chemistry and physicsSame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207