Cloud condensation nuclei closure study on summer arctic aerosol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. We present an aerosol – cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) closure study on summer high Arctic aerosol based on measurements that were carried out in 2008 during the Arctic Summer Cloud Ocean Study (ASCOS) on board the Swedish ice breaker Oden. The data presented here were collected during a three-week time period in the pack ice (>85° N) when the icebreaker Oden was moored to an ice floe and drifted passively during the most biological active period into autumn freeze up conditions. CCN number concentrations were obtained using two CCN counters measuring at different supersaturations. The directly measured CCN number concentration was then compared with a CCN number concentration calculated using both bulk aerosol mass composition data from an aerosol mass spectrometer (AMS) and aerosol number size distributions obtained from a differential mobility particle sizer, assuming κ-Köhler theory, surface tension of water and an internally mixed aerosol. The last assumption was supported by measurements made with a hygroscopic tandem differential mobility analyzer (HTDMA) for particles >70 nm. For the two highest measured supersaturations, 0.73 and 0.41%, closure could not be achieved with the investigated settings concerning hygroscopicity and density. The calculated CCN number concentration was always higher than the measured one for those two supersaturations. This might be caused by a relative larger insoluble organic mass fraction of the smaller particles that activate at these supersaturations, which are thus less good CCN than the larger particles. On average, 36% of the mass measured with the AMS was organic mass. At 0.20, 0.15 and 0.10% supersaturation, closure could be achieved with different combinations of hygroscopic parameters and densities within the uncertainty range of the fit. The best agreement of the calculated CCN number concentration with the observed one was achieved when the organic fraction of the aerosol was treated as nearly water insoluble (κorg=0.02), leading to a mean total κ, κtot, of 0.33 ± 0.13. However, several settings led to closure and κorg=0.2 is found to be an upper limit at 0.1% supersaturation. κorg≤0.2 leads to a κtot range of 0.33 ± 013 to 0.50 ± 0.11. Thus, the organic material ranges from being sparingly soluble to effectively insoluble. These results suggest that an increase in organic mass fraction in particles of a certain size would lead to a suppression of the Arctic CCN activity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 teacher head, 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".