Impact of Measurement Uncertainties on Receptor Modeling of Speciated Atmospheric Mercury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gaseous oxidized mercury (GOM) and particle-bound mercury (PBM) measurement uncertainties could potentially affect the analysis and modeling of atmospheric mercury. This study investigated the impact of GOM measurement uncertainties on Principal Components Analysis (PCA), Absolute Principal Component Scores (APCS), and Concentration-Weighted Trajectory (CWT) receptor modeling results. The atmospheric mercury data input into these receptor models were modified by combining GOM and PBM into a single reactive mercury (RM) parameter and excluding low GOM measurements to improve the data quality. PCA and APCS results derived from RM or excluding low GOM measurements were similar to those in previous studies, except for a non-unique component and an additional component extracted from the RM dataset. The percent variance explained by the major components from a previous study differed slightly compared to RM and excluding low GOM measurements. CWT results were more sensitive to the input of RM than GOM excluding low measurements. Larger discrepancies were found between RM and GOM source regions than those between RM and PBM. Depending on the season, CWT source regions of RM differed by 40-61% compared to GOM from a previous study. No improvement in correlations between CWT results and anthropogenic mercury emissions were found.
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 | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".