Chemical cycling and deposition of atmospheric mercury in polar regions:review of recent measurements and comparison with models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Mercury (Hg) is a worldwide contaminant that can cause adverse health effects to wildlife and humans. While atmospheric modeling traces the link from emissions to deposition of Hg onto environmental surfaces, large uncertainties arise from our incomplete understanding of atmospheric processes (oxidation pathways, deposition, and re-emission). Atmospheric Hg reactivity is exacerbated in high latitudes and there is still much to be learned from polar regions in terms of atmospheric processes. This paper provides a synthesis of the atmospheric Hg monitoring data available in recent years (2011–2015) in the Arctic and in Antarctica along with a comparison of these observations with numerical simulations using four cutting-edge global models. The cycle of atmospheric Hg in the Arctic and in Antarctica presents both similarities and differences. Coastal sites in the two regions are both influenced by springtime atmospheric Hg depletion events and by summertime snowpack re-emission and oceanic evasion of Hg. The cycle of atmospheric Hg differs between the two regions primarily because of their different geography. While Arctic sites are significantly influenced by northern hemispheric Hg emissions especially in winter, coastal Antarctic sites are significantly influenced by the reactivity observed on the East Antarctic ice sheet due to katabatic winds. Based on the comparison of multi-model simulations with observations, this paper discusses whether the processes that affect atmospheric Hg seasonality and interannual variability are appropriately represented in the models and identifies research gaps in our understanding of the atmospheric Hg cycling in high latitudes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".