The weekend effect within and downwind of Sacramento – Part 1: Observations of ozone, nitrogen oxides, and VOC reactivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Day-of-week patterns in human activities can be used to examine the ways in which differences in primary emissions result in changes in the rates of photochemical reactions, and the production of secondary pollutants. Data from twelve California Air Resources Board monitoring sites in Sacramento, CA, and the downwind Mountain Counties air basin are analyzed to reveal day of week patterns in ozone and its precursors in the summers of 1998–2002. Measurements of non-methane hydrocarbons are available for the summers of 2001–2003 at three of these sites and NOx at six of these sites for the full time period. This routine monitoring data is complemented by data sets of ozone and nitrogen oxide concentrations obtained in the summers of 2001 and 2003 at three sites in the region and comprehensive measurements of VOC reactivity at two sites in 2001. Daytime concentrations of nitrogen oxides (NOx≡NO+NO2) are approximately 35% lower on weekends at all the sites, whereas the VOC reactivity changes by less than 10%. All six sites in the Sacramento Valley have higher 8-h maximum average ozone on the weekend and are more likely to exceed the national standard of 85 ppb on the weekend. In contrast, all the sites in the Mountain Counties are less likely to exceed the federal ozone standard on the weekend. Analysis of the day-of-week trends in odd oxygen show that the weekend effect of ozone within Sacramento is strongly influenced by NO sources close to the monitoring sites. This suggests that ozone measurements from monitoring sites close to highways, including two rural locations, may not be representative of the regional abundance, and lead to underestimates of long term exposure for humans and ecosystems.
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 | 0.000 | 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".