MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117282496 · doi:10.1029/2002jd002208

Tunable diode laser measurements of formaldehyde during the TOPSE 2000 study: Distributions, trends, and model comparisons

2003· article· en· W2117282496 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alan Fried, Yuhang Wang, C. A. Cantrell, Bryan P. Wert, J. Walega, B. A. Ridley, E. Atlas, R. E. Shetter, B. L. Lefer, M. T. Coffey, D. R. Blake, N. Blake, Simone Meinardi, Bob Talbot, Jack E. Dibb, E. Scheuer, O. W. Wingenter, J. Snow, B. Heikes, D. H. Ehhalt

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of VirginiaNational Center for Atmospheric ResearchNational Science Foundation
KeywordsAtmospheric sciencesEnvironmental scienceAltitude (triangle)TroposphereOzoneLatitudeArcticFormaldehydeClimatologyMeteorologyChemistryPhysicsGeologyGeodesy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Airborne measurements of formaldehyde (CH 2 O) were acquired employing tunable diode laser absorption spectroscopy (TDLAS) during the 2000 Tropospheric Ozone Production About the Spring Equinox (TOPSE) study. This study consisted of seven deployments spanning the time period from 4 February to 23 May 2000 and covered a wide latitudinal band from 40°N to 85°N. The median measured CH 2 O concentrations, with a few exceptions, did not show any clear temporal trends from February to May in each of five altitude and three latitude bins examined. Detailed measurement–model comparisons were carried out using a variety of approaches employing two different steady state models. Because recent emissions of CH 2 O and/or its precursors often result in model underpredictions, background conditions were identified using a number of chemical tracers. For background conditions at temperatures warmer than −45°C, the measurement–model agreement on average ranged between −13% and +5% (measurement–model/measurement), which corresponded to mean and median (measurement–model) differences of 3 ± 69 and −6 parts per trillion by volume (pptv), respectively. At very low temperatures starting at around −45°C, significant and persistent (measurement–model) differences were observed from February to early April from southern Canada to the Arctic Ocean in the 6–8 km altitude range. In such cases, measured CH 2 O was as much as 392 pptv higher than modeled, and the median difference was 132 pptv (83%). Low light conditions as well as cold temperatures may be important in this effect. A number of possible mechanisms involving the reaction of CH 3 O 2 with HO 2 to produce CH 2 O directly were investigated, but in each case the discrepancy was only minimally reduced. Other possibilities were also considered but in each case there was no compelling evidence to support any of the hypotheses. Whatever the cause, the elevated CH 2 O concentrations significantly impact upper tropospheric HO x levels at high latitudes (>57°N) in the February–April time frame.

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 score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.418

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations82
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207