MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2595216645 · doi:10.1002/2016gl071791

Understanding ozone‐meteorology correlations: A role for dry deposition

2017· article· en· W2595216645 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOzoneEnvironmental scienceAtmospheric sciencesHumidityRelative humidityWater vaporDeposition (geology)MeteorologyClimatologyAir quality indexVapour Pressure DeficitGeographyChemistryGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Observations of coincident high relative humidity and low surface ozone are common in air quality data sets, but models underpredict the strength of this correlation. We perform a statistical analysis of 28 years of ozone and meteorology observations taken as part of the Clean Air Status and Trends Network across the United States and find that vapor pressure deficit (VPD) is the strongest predictor of midday ozone in the spring, summer, and fall, and this correlation is strongest at sites with the largest leaf area index. We argue that stomatal regulation of dry deposition, which is known to have a VPD dependence that is not typically included in model parameterizations, can explain this relationship. Using a box model of ozone production and loss, we show that a negative ozone‐humidity slope is only achieved by the inclusion of VPD‐dependent dry deposition, suggesting that this mechanism may explain the observed ozone‐humidity correlation.

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.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.412
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 studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.216 · 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