MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2612165904 · doi:10.1002/joc.5050

Simulated effects of internal mixing of anthropogenic aerosols on the aerosol–radiation interaction and global temperature

2017· article· en· W2612165904 on OpenAlexaff
Chen Zhou, Hua Zhang, Shuyun Zhao, Jiangnan Li

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Climatology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersGovernment of Jiangsu ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsRadiative forcingAerosolAtmospheric sciencesClimatologyEnvironmental scienceTroposphereRadiative transferForcing (mathematics)MeteorologyPhysicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT A partial internal mixing (PIM) treatment of black carbon (BC), organic carbon (OC), and sulphate was examined, and the core‐shell model was used to represent the internally mixed aerosols with BC as the core and sulphate or OC as the shell. The influences of PIM treatment on the effective radiative forcing due to aerosol–radiative interaction (ERFari) and global temperature were examined and compared to those of external mixing (EM) treatment using an aerosol‐climate online coupled model of BCC_AGCM2.0_CUACE/Aero. Radiative forcing due to aerosol–radiation interaction (RFari) of the anthropogenic aerosols since the preindustrial era was −0.34 W m−2 for EM and −0.23 W m−2 for PIM, respectively. The global annual mean ERFari of anthropogenic aerosols since the preindustrial era was −0.42 W m−2 for EM and −0.34 W m−2 for PIM, respectively. The change in global annual mean surface temperature increased accordingly from −0.18 K in the EM case to −0.125 K in the PIM case. Well geographic consistence between the change in low‐level cloud amount and the change in temperature can be found. The atmospheric temperature in the troposphere was markedly less reduced in the PIM case than in the EM case. The RFari/ERFari for 50% and 100% were −0.11/–0.07 and 0.13/0.14 W m−2, respectively. RFari, ERFari, and surface temperature changed approximately linearly with the internal mixing proportion.

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)0.001
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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.280
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations16
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of ClimatologySame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207