MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2616810966 · doi:10.1021/acs.est.7b00328

Identification of Major Sources of Atmospheric NH<sub>3</sub> in an Urban Environment in Northern China During Wintertime

2017· article· en· W2616810966 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaolin Teng, Qingjing Hu, Leiming Zhang, Jiajia Qi, Jinhui Shi, Huan Xie, Huiwang Gao, Xiaohong Yao

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsEnvironmental sciencePrecipitationAtmospheric sciencesEvaporationPollutantMeteorologyGeographyChemistryGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To assess the relative contributions of traffic emission and other potential sources to high levels of atmospheric ammonia (NH 3 ) in urban areas in the wintertime, atmospheric NH 3 and related pollutants were measured at an urban site, ∼300 m from a major traffic road, in northern China in November and December 2015. Hourly average NH 3 varied from 0.3 to 10.8 ppb with an average of 2.4 ppb during the campaign. Contrary to the common perspective in literature, traffic emission was demonstrated to be a negligible contributor to atmospheric NH 3 . Atmospheric NH 3 correlated well with ambient water vapor during many time periods lasting from tens of hours to several days, implying NH 3 released from water evaporation is an important source. Emissions from local green space inside the urban areas were identified to significantly contribute to the observed atmospheric NH 3 during ∼60% of the sampling times. Evaporation of predeposited NH x through wet precipitation combined with emissions from local green space likely caused the spikes of atmospheric NH 3 mostly occurring 1–4 h after morning rush hours or after and during slight shower events. There are still ∼30% of the data samples with appreciable NH 3 level for which major contributors are yet to be identified.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.808

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 studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.173 · 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.

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

Citations116
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207