MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2587099435 · doi:10.5194/acpd-15-29079-2015

Processes controlling the seasonal cycle of Arctic aerosol number and size distributions

2015· article· en· W2587099435 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Betty Croft, Randall V. Martin, W. R. Leaitch, Peter Tunved, T. J. Breider, S. D. D'Andrea, Jeffrey R. Pierce

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAerosolAtmospheric sciencesEnvironmental scienceArcticParticle numberAnnual cycleParticle (ecology)ClimatologyMeteorologyGeographyPhysicsOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Measurements at high-Arctic sites show a strong seasonal cycle in aerosol number and size. The number of aerosols with diameters larger than 20 nm exhibits a maximum in late spring associated with a dominant accumulation mode (0.1 to 1 μm in diameter), and a second maximum in the summer associated with a dominant Aitken mode (10 to 100 nm in diameter). Seasonal-mean aerosol effective diameter ranges from about 180 nm in summer to 260 nm in winter. This study interprets these seasonal cycles with the GEOS-Chem-TOMAS global aerosol microphysics model. We find improved agreement with in-situ measurements of aerosol size at both Alert, Nunavut, and Mt. Zeppelin, Svalbard following model developments that: (1) increase the efficiency of wet scavenging in the Arctic summer and (2) represent coagulation between interstitial aerosols and aerosols activated to form cloud droplets. Our simulations indicate that the dominant summertime Aitken mode is associated with increased efficiency of wet removal, which limits the number of larger aerosols and promotes local new-particle formation. We also find an important role of interstitial coagulation in clouds in the Arctic, which limits the number of Aitken-mode aerosols in the non-summer seasons when direct wet removal of these aerosols is inefficient. Total aerosol number reaches a minimum in October at both Alert and Mt. Zeppelin. Our simulations indicate that this October minimum can be explained by diminishing local new-particle formation, limited transport of pollution from lower latitudes, and efficient wet removal. We recommend that the key processes of aerosol wet removal, interstitial coagulation and new-particle formation be carefully considered in size-resolved aerosol simulations of the Arctic. Uncertainties about these processes, which strongly control the seasonal cycle of aerosol number and size, limit confidence in estimates of aerosol radiative effects on the Arctic climate.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols→French-language works237,207→