MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2176871732 · doi:10.1175/jamc-d-15-0060.1

Diurnal Course of Carbon Dioxide Mixing Ratios in the Urban Boundary Layer in Response to Surface Emissions

2016· article· en· W2176871732 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ben Crawford, Andreas Christen, Ian G. McKendry

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdvectionEntrainment (biomusicology)Environmental scienceEddy covarianceAtmospheric sciencesBoundary layerMixing ratioDiurnal cyclePlanetary boundary layerGreenhouse gasFlux (metallurgy)TurbulenceConvective Boundary LayerMixing (physics)Stratification (seeds)MeteorologyMechanicsGeologyMaterials sciencePhysicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Observations of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) mixing ratios in the urban boundary layer (UBL) are rare, even though there is potential for such measurements to be used to monitor city-scale net CO 2 emissions. This work presents a unique dataset of CO 2 mixing ratios observed in the UBL above Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, by means of a tethered balloon system over a continuous 24-h summertime period. Vertical profiles of CO 2 mixing ratios are found to vary according to UBL thermal structure and mechanical dynamics (development of convective and nocturnal boundary layers, vertical mixing from mechanical turbulence, horizontal advection from land–sea thermal breezes, and vertical entrainment). A box model is applied to quantify net city-scale surface emissions to the UBL volume using the measured rate of change of UBL CO 2 mixing ratios and estimated CO 2 advection and entrainment fluxes. The diurnal course of city-scale net emissions predicted by the model is similar to simultaneous local-scale eddy-covariance CO 2 flux measurements, although there are relatively large uncertainties in hourly model calculations of horizontal advection and vertical entrainment fluxes due to inputs of regional background CO 2 mixing ratios. Daily city-scale emissions totals predicted by the model (20.2 gC m −2 day −1 ) are 35% larger than those measured simultaneously on an urban local-scale eddy-covariance flux tower and are within 32% of a spatially scaled municipal greenhouse gas inventory. However, these methods are not expected to agree exactly because they represent different spatial source areas and include different CO 2 source and sink processes.

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)0.002
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 score0.426
Threshold uncertainty score0.226

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations18
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Meteorology and ClimatologySame topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207