MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161113310 · doi:10.4209/aaqr.2012.07.0192

Characterization and Source Apportionment of PM2.5 in an Urban Environment in Beijing

2013· article· en· W2161113310 on OpenAlex
Lingda Yu, Guangfu Wang, Renjian Zhang, Leiming Zhang, Yu Song, Wu Bingbing, Xufang Li, Kun An, Junhan Chu

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAerosol and Air Quality Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsCombustionEnvironmental scienceBiomass burningEnvironmental chemistryBeijingCoal combustion productsApportionmentAerosolSulfurAtmospheric sciencesChemistryMeteorologyGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Daily 24-hour PM2.5 samples were collected continuously from January 1 to December 31, 2010. Elemental concentrations from Al to Pb were obtained using particle induced X-ray emission (PIXE) method. This was the first full year continuous daily PM2.5 elemental composition dataset in Beijing. Source apportionment analysis was conducted on this dataset using the positive matrix factorization method. Seven sources and their contributions to the total PM2.5 mass were identified and quantified. These include secondary sulphur– 13.8 μg/m3, 26.5%; vehicle exhaust– 8.9 μg/m3, 17.1%; fossil fuel combustion– 8.3 μg/m3, 16%; road dust– 6.6 μg/m3, 12.7%; biomass burning– 5.8 μg/m3, 11.2%; soil dust– 5.4 μg/m3, 10.4%; and metal processing– 3.1 μg/m3, 6.0%. Fugitive dusts (including soil dust and road dust) showed the highest contribution of 20.7 μg/m3 in the spring, doubling those in other seasons. On the contrary, contributions of the combustion source types (including biomass burning and fossil fuel combustion) were significantly higher in the fall (14.2 μg/m3) and in the winter (24.5 μg/m3) compared to those in the spring and summer (9.6 and 8.0 μg/m3, respectively). Secondary sulphur contributed the most in the summer while vehicle exhaust and metal processing sources did not show any clear seasonal pattern. The different seasonal highs and lows from different sources compensated each other. This explains the very small seasonal variations (< 20%) in the total PM2.5.

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.

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)0.003
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 score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.532

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.264 · 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