MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114603113 · doi:10.1029/2011gl050273

Air quality over the Canadian oil sands: A first assessment using satellite observations

2012· article· en· W2114603113 on OpenAlexaffabout
C. A. McLinden, Vitali Fioletov, K. F. Boersma, N. A. Krotkov, Christopher E. Sioris, Pepijn Veefkind, Kai Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersEarth Sciences Division
KeywordsSatelliteOil sandsEnvironmental scienceGeologyQuality (philosophy)MeteorologyClimatologyRemote sensingGeographyAsphaltArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Results from the first assessment of air quality over the Canadian oil sands–one of the largest industrial undertakings in human history–using satellite remote sensing observations of two pollutants, nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ) and sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ), are presented. High‐resolution maps were created that revealed distinct enhancements in both species over an area (roughly 30 km × 50 km) of intensive surface mining at scales of a few kilometers. The magnitude of these enhancements, quantified in terms of total mass, are comparable to the largest seen in Canada from individual sources. The rate of increase in NO 2 between 2005 and 2010 was assessed at 10.4 ± 3.5%/year and resulted from increases both in local values as well as the spatial extent of the enhancement. This is broadly consistent with both surface‐measurement trends and increases in annual bitumen production. An increase in SO 2 was also found, but given larger uncertainties, it is not statistically significant.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.317
Threshold uncertainty score0.955

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations171
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207