MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149451042 · doi:10.5194/acp-16-2221-2016

What controls the vertical distribution of aerosol? Relationships between process sensitivity in HadGEM3–UKCA and inter-model variation from AeroCom Phase II

2016· article· en· W2149451042 on OpenAlexafffund
Zak Kipling, Philip Stier, Colin Johnson, G. W. Mann, Nicolas Bellouin, Susanne E. Bauer, Tommi Bergman, Mian Chin, T. Diehl, S. J. Ghan, Trond Iversen, Alf Kirkevåg, Harri Kokkola, Xiaohong Liu, Gan Luo, Twan van Noije, K. J. Pringle, Knut von Salzen, Michael Schulz, Øyvind Seland, Ragnhild Bieltvedt Skeie, Toshihiko Takemura, Kostas Tsigaridis, Kai Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric chemistry and physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersSLAC National Accelerator LaboratoryEuropean Research CouncilPacific Northwest National LaboratoryNatural Environment Research CouncilGoddard Space Flight CenterOffice of ScienceEuropean Centre for Medium-Range Weather ForecastsMax-Planck-GesellschaftNational Institute for Environmental StudiesU.S. Department of EnergyEuropean CommissionSight Research UKJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceNorges ForskningsrådAcademy of FinlandDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, UK GovernmentCanadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric SciencesMet OfficeDeutsches KlimarechenzentrumBattelleNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsAerosolTroposphereAtmospheric sciencesMineral dustScavengingRadiative transferCloud condensation nucleiSea saltEnvironmental scienceParticle (ecology)Planetary boundary layerBoundary layerChemistryGeologyMechanicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The vertical profile of aerosol is important for its radiative effects, but weakly constrained by observations on the global scale, and highly variable among different models. To investigate the controlling factors in one particular model, we investigate the effects of individual processes in HadGEM3–UKCA and compare the resulting diversity of aerosol vertical profiles with the inter-model diversity from the AeroCom Phase II control experiment. In this way we show that (in this model at least) the vertical profile is controlled by a relatively small number of processes, although these vary among aerosol components and particle sizes. We also show that sufficiently coarse variations in these processes can produce a similar diversity to that among different models in terms of the global-mean profile and, to a lesser extent, the zonal-mean vertical position. However, there are features of certain models' profiles that cannot be reproduced, suggesting the influence of further structural differences between models. In HadGEM3–UKCA, convective transport is found to be very important in controlling the vertical profile of all aerosol components by mass. In-cloud scavenging is very important for all except mineral dust. Growth by condensation is important for sulfate and carbonaceous aerosol (along with aqueous oxidation for the former and ageing by soluble material for the latter). The vertical extent of biomass-burning emissions into the free troposphere is also important for the profile of carbonaceous aerosol. Boundary-layer mixing plays a dominant role for sea salt and mineral dust, which are emitted only from the surface. Dry deposition and below-cloud scavenging are important for the profile of mineral dust only. In this model, the microphysical processes of nucleation, condensation and coagulation dominate the vertical profile of the smallest particles by number (e.g. total CN > 3 nm), while the profiles of larger particles (e.g. CN > 100 nm) are controlled by the same processes as the component mass profiles, plus the size distribution of primary emissions. We also show that the processes that affect the AOD-normalised radiative forcing in the model are predominantly those that affect the vertical mass distribution, in particular convective transport, in-cloud scavenging, aqueous oxidation, ageing and the vertical extent of biomass-burning emissions.

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)0.000
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 score0.344
Threshold uncertainty score0.477

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations124
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmospheric chemistry and physicsSame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207