Spectroscopic measurements of tropospheric CO, C<sub>2</sub>H<sub>6</sub>, C<sub>2</sub>H<sub>2</sub>, and HCN in northern Japan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tropospheric column amounts and mixing ratios of CO, C2H6, C2H2, and HCN were retrieved from ground‐based infrared solar spectra using a vertical profile retrieval algorithm (SFIT2). The spectra were recorded with high spectral resolution Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectrometers at Moshiri (44.4°N) and Rikubetsu (43.5°N) in northern Japan from May 1995 to June 2000. The retrievals show significant seasonal variations in the tropospheric content of the four molecules over northern Japan with maxima in winter‐spring (February–April) for CO, C2H6, and C2H2 and in summer (May–July) for HCN. Good correlations between CO, C2H6, and C2H2 indicated that they had similar sources and underwent similar dilution processes. Deviation of HCN relative to its seasonal mean value (ΔHCN) is correlated with the similar deviation of CO (ΔCO), indicating that enhancements of CO and HCN above the mean levels were probably due to the same sources. Linear trends in tropospheric CO, C2H6, and C2H2 from May 1995 to June 2000 (excluding 1998) were (−2.10 ± 0.30), (−2.53 ± 0.30), and (−3.99 ± 0.57)%/yr, respectively, while the trend of (−0.93 ± 0.49)%/yr in HCN was relatively small. Abnormally high tropospheric amounts of the four molecules were recorded in 1998. HCN amounts were found to be much higher than its seasonal mean value throughout 1998 with a 65% maximum increase in August 1998. Significant increases of CO, C2H6, and C2H2 took place in August–October 1998. Trajectory calculations, global fire maps, and satellite smoke images revealed that biomass burning in eastern Siberia from mid‐July to early October 1998 was the major cause of the elevated levels in tropospheric CO, C2H6, C2H2, and HCN observed in northern Japan in 1998.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".