MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2555324836 · doi:10.5194/acp-17-3699-2017

Wintertime enhancements of sea salt aerosol in polar regions consistent with a sea ice source from blowing snow

2017· article· en· W2555324836 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jiayue Huang, Lyatt Jaeglé

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric chemistry and physics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNOAA Pacific Marine Environmental LaboratoryNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsSnowEnvironmental scienceSea iceArcticAtmospheric sciencesFrost (temperature)ClimatologyArctic geoengineeringSea sprayArctic ice packPolarAerosolAntarctic sea iceOceanographyGeologyMeteorologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Sea salt aerosols (SSA) are generated via air bubbles bursting at the ocean surface as well as by wind mobilization of saline snow and frost flowers over sea-ice-covered areas. The relative magnitude of these sources remains poorly constrained over polar regions, affecting our ability to predict their impact on halogen chemistry, cloud formation, and climate. We implement a blowing snow and a frost flower emission scheme in the GEOS-Chem global chemical transport model, which we validate against multiyear (2001–2008) in situ observations of SSA mass concentrations at three sites in the Arctic, two sites in coastal Antarctica, and from the 2008 ICEALOT cruise in the Arctic. A simulation including only open ocean emissions underestimates SSA mass concentrations by factors of 2–10 during winter–spring for all ground-based and ship-based observations. When blowing snow emissions are added, the model is able to reproduce observed wintertime SSA concentrations, with the model bias decreasing from a range of −80 to −34 % for the open ocean simulation to −2 to +9 % for the simulation with blowing snow emissions. We find that the frost flower parameterization cannot fully explain the high wintertime concentrations and displays a seasonal cycle decreasing too rapidly in early spring. Furthermore, the high day-to-day variability of observed SSA is better reproduced by the blowing snow parameterization. Over the Arctic (> 60° N) (Antarctic, > 60° S), we calculate that submicron SSA emissions from blowing snow account for 1.0 Tg yr−1 (2.5 Tg yr−1), while frost flower emissions lead to 0.21 Tg yr−1 (0.25 Tg yr−1) compared to 0.78 Tg yr−1 (1.0 Tg yr−1) from the open ocean. Blowing snow emissions are largest in regions where persistent strong winds occur over sea ice (east of Greenland, over the central Arctic, Beaufort Sea, and the Ross and Weddell seas). In contrast, frost flower emissions are largest where cold air temperatures and open leads are co-located (over the Canadian Arctic Archipelago, coastal regions of Siberia, and off the Ross and Ronne ice shelves). Overall, in situ observations of mass concentrations of SSA suggest that blowing snow is likely to be the dominant SSA source during winter, with frost flowers playing a much smaller role.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.698
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.207
Teacher spread0.196 · 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.

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

Citations165
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmospheric chemistry and physicsSame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207