MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W26500222 · doi:10.1177/0960327115611971

What do we learn from EC (black carbon), OC and their Isotope Measurements in Fine Airborne PM over Canada?

2009· article· en· W26500222 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ling Huang, W Zhang, Sudhir Kumar Sharma

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman & Experimental Toxicology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSootCarbon blackEnvironmental scienceRadiative forcingParticulatesAtmosphere (unit)CombustionCarbon fibersAerosolEnvironmental chemistryPollutantAtmospheric sciencesAir pollutionIsotopes of carbonFossil fuelTotal organic carbonBiomass burningMeteorologyChemistryGeographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Elemental carbon and organic carbon (EC & OC) components in fine airborne carbonaceous particulate matter (PM) are major air pollutants existing in urban, rural and remote environments as well as key players in climate change (via radiative forcing). It is known that both EC (also called as black carbon or soot) and OC are released from various emission sources (e.g., fossil fuel combustion, biomass burning) and OC is also produced in the atmosphere through photochemical oxidations from gas phase organics. Tracking their spatial (e.g., from urban to rural to background air or latitudinal) and temporal (e.g. seasonal and inter-annual) distributions will provide valuable information to constraining emission sources and atmospheric transport/transformation mechanisms as well as to assessing effectiveness of mitigation for these pollutants.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.688
Threshold uncertainty score0.620

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman & Experimental ToxicologySame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207