MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123414769 · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/8/4/044011

Impacts of the East Asian monsoon on lower tropospheric ozone over coastal South China

2013· article· en· W2123414769 on OpenAlexaff
Derong Zhou, Aijun Ding, Huiting Mao, Congbin Fu, Tao Wang, Ke Ding, Yang Zhang, Jane Liu, Lu An, Nan Hao

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Research Letters · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTroposphereEnvironmental scienceClimatologyAtmospheric sciencesTropospheric ozoneOzoneMonsoonEast Asian MonsoonAltitude (triangle)East AsiaPrecipitationChinaGeologyMeteorologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The impact of the East Asian monsoon (EAM) on climatology and interannual variability of tropospheric ozone (O 3 ) over the coastal South China was investigated by analyzing 11 years of ozonesonde data over Hong Kong with the aid of Lagrangian dispersion modeling of carbon monoxide and calculation of an EAM index. It was found that the seasonal cycle of O 3 in the lower troposphere is highly related to the EAM over the study region. Ozone enhancements in the free troposphere are associated with the monsoon-induced transport of pollutants of continental anthropogenic and biomass burning origins. Lower tropospheric O 3 levels showed high interannual variability, with an annual averaged amplitude up to 61% of averaged concentrations in the boundary layer (0–1 km altitudes) and 49% below 3 km altitude. In spring and autumn, the interannual variability in boundary layer O 3 levels was predominately influenced by the EAM intensity, with high O 3 mixing ratios associated with northeasterly circulation anomalies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.342
Threshold uncertainty score0.680

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 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

Citations73
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Research LettersSame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207