MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157637745 · doi:10.5194/acp-12-2037-2012

Modelling future changes in surface ozone: a parameterized approach

2012· article· en· W2157637745 on OpenAlexaff
Oliver Wild, Arlene M. Fiore, Drew Shindell, Ruth M. Doherty, W. J. Collins, F. J. Dentener, Martin G. Schultz, Sunling Gong, Ian A. MacKenzie, Guang Zeng, Peter Hess, B. N. Duncan, D. J. Bergmann, Sophie Szopa, Jan Eiof Jonson, Terry Keating, A. Zuber

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric chemistry and physics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOzoneMethaneAtmospheric sciencesEnvironmental scienceChemical transport modelLimitingClimatologyMeteorologyChemistryGeographyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. This study describes a simple parameterization to estimate regionally averaged changes in surface ozone due to past or future changes in anthropogenic precursor emissions based on results from 14 global chemistry transport models. The method successfully reproduces the results of full simulations with these models. For a given emission scenario it provides the ensemble mean surface ozone change, a regional source attribution for each change, and an estimate of the associated uncertainty as represented by the variation between models. Using the Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) emission scenarios as an example, we show how regional surface ozone is likely to respond to emission changes by 2050 and how changes in precursor emissions and atmospheric methane contribute to this. Surface ozone changes are substantially smaller than expected with the SRES A1B, A2 and B2 scenarios, with annual global mean reductions of as much as 2 ppb by 2050 vs. increases of 4–6 ppb under SRES, and this reflects the assumptions of more stringent precursor emission controls under the RCP scenarios. We find an average difference of around 5 ppb between the outlying RCP 2.6 and RCP 8.5 scenarios, about 75% of which can be attributed to differences in methane abundance. The study reveals the increasing importance of limiting atmospheric methane growth as emissions of other precursors are controlled, but highlights differences in modelled ozone responses to methane changes of as much as a factor of two, indicating that this remains a major uncertainty in current models.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.537
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.184 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations167
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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