MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2517584903 · doi:10.5194/acp-16-15741-2016

Model sensitivity studies of the decrease in atmospheric carbon tetrachloride

2016· article· en· W2517584903 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Martyn P. Chipperfield, Qing Liang, Matthew Rigby, Ryan Hossaini, S. A. Montzka, Sandip Dhomse, Wuhu Feng, Ronald G. Prinn, Ray F. Weiss, Christina M. Harth, Peter K. Salameh, Jens Mühle, Simon O’Doherty, Dickon Young, Peter G. Simmonds, Paul B. Krummel, Paul J. Fraser, L. P. Steele, James D. Happell, R. C. Rhew, J. H. Butler, S. A. Yvon‐Lewis, B. D. Hall, David Nance, F. L. Moore, B. R. Miller, James W. Elkins, Jeremy J. Harrison, C. D. Boone, E. Atlas, Emmanuel Mahieu

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric chemistry and physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilCanadian Space AgencyU.S. Department of EnergyUniversité de LiègeUniversity of BristolNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationSight Research UKNational Science FoundationNational Centre for Earth ObservationFonds De La Recherche Scientifique - FNRSDepartment of Energy and Climate ChangeFédération Wallonie-BruxellesNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
KeywordsTroposphereStratospherePhotodissociationCarbon tetrachlorideSink (geography)Atmospheric sciencesOzoneChemistrySoil waterOzone depletionEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental chemistryPhotochemistrySoil sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Carbon tetrachloride (CCl4) is an ozone-depleting substance, which is controlled by the Montreal Protocol and for which the atmospheric abundance is decreasing. However, the current observed rate of this decrease is known to be slower than expected based on reported CCl4 emissions and its estimated overall atmospheric lifetime. Here we use a three-dimensional (3-D) chemical transport model to investigate the impact on its predicted decay of uncertainties in the rates at which CCl4 is removed from the atmosphere by photolysis, by ocean uptake and by degradation in soils. The largest sink is atmospheric photolysis (74 % of total), but a reported 10 % uncertainty in its combined photolysis cross section and quantum yield has only a modest impact on the modelled rate of CCl4 decay. This is partly due to the limiting effect of the rate of transport of CCl4 from the main tropospheric reservoir to the stratosphere, where photolytic loss occurs. The model suggests large interannual variability in the magnitude of this stratospheric photolysis sink caused by variations in transport. The impact of uncertainty in the minor soil sink (9 % of total) is also relatively small. In contrast, the model shows that uncertainty in ocean loss (17 % of total) has the largest impact on modelled CCl4 decay due to its sizeable contribution to CCl4 loss and large lifetime uncertainty range (147 to 241 years). With an assumed CCl4 emission rate of 39 Gg year−1, the reference simulation with the best estimate of loss processes still underestimates the observed CCl4 (overestimates the decay) over the past 2 decades but to a smaller extent than previous studies. Changes to the rate of CCl4 loss processes, in line with known uncertainties, could bring the model into agreement with in situ surface and remote-sensing measurements, as could an increase in emissions to around 47 Gg year−1. Further progress in constraining the CCl4 budget is partly limited by systematic biases between observational datasets. For example, surface observations from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) network are larger than from the Advanced Global Atmospheric Gases Experiment (AGAGE) network but have shown a steeper decreasing trend over the past 2 decades. These differences imply a difference in emissions which is significant relative to uncertainties in the magnitudes of the CCl4 sinks.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.132

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.219
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmospheric chemistry and physics→Same topicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate→French-language works237,207→