MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2120950696 · doi:10.5194/acp-13-11287-2013

Method development estimating ambient oxidized mercury concentration from monitored mercury wet deposition

2013· article· en· W2120950696 on OpenAlexaff
Shengyang Chen, Xin Qiu, Leiming Zhang, Fan Yang, P. Blanchard

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric chemistry and physics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMercury (programming language)Deposition (geology)Environmental chemistryElemental mercuryMERCUREEnvironmental scienceChemistryAerosolParticulatesAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Geology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. To quantify mercury dry deposition, the Atmospheric Mercury Network (AMNet) of the National Atmospheric Deposition Program (NADP) was established recently to monitor the speciated atmospheric mercury (i.e. gaseous elemental mercury (GEM), gaseous oxidized mercury (GOM) and particulate-bound mercury (PBM)). However, the spatial coverage of AMNet is far less than the long-established Mercury Deposition Network (MDN) for wet deposition monitoring. The present study describes the first attempt linking ambient concentration of the oxidized mercury (GOM + PBM) with wet deposition aiming to estimate GOM + PBM roughly at locations and/or times where such measurement is not available but where wet deposition is monitored. The beta distribution function is used to describe the distribution of GOM + PBM and is used to predict GOM + PBM from monitored wet deposition. The mean, median, mode, standard deviation, and skewness of the fitted beta distribution parameters were generated using data collected in 2009 at multiple monitoring superstations. The established beta distribution function from the 2009 GOM + PBM data is used to construct a model that predicts GOM + PBM from wet deposition data. The model is validated using 2010 data at multiple stations, and the predicted monthly GOM + PBM concentrations agree reasonably well with measurements. The model has many potential applications after further improvements and validation using different data sets.

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)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.235 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmospheric chemistry and physics→Same topicMercury impact and mitigation studies→French-language works237,207→