Boundary layer and free-tropospheric dimethyl sulfide in the Arctic spring and summer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Vertical distributions of atmospheric dimethyl sulfide (DMS(g)) were sampled aboard the research aircraft Polar 6 near Lancaster Sound, Nunavut, Canada, in July 2014 and on pan-Arctic flights in April 2015 that started from Longyearbyen, Spitzbergen, and passed through Alert and Eureka, Nunavut, and Inuvik, Northwest Territories. Larger mean DMS(g) mixing ratios were present during April 2015 (campaign mean of 116 ± 8 pptv) compared to July 2014 (campaign mean of 20 ± 6 pptv). During July 2014, the largest mixing ratios were found near the surface over the ice edge and open water. DMS(g) mixing ratios decreased with altitude up to about 3 km. During April 2015, profiles of DMS(g) were more uniform with height and some profiles showed an increase with altitude. DMS reached as high as 100 pptv near 2500 m. Relative to the observation averages, GEOS-Chem (www.geos-chem.org) chemical transport model simulations were higher during July and lower during April. Based on the simulations, more than 90 % of the July DMS(g) below 2 km and more than 90 % of the April DMS(g) originated from Arctic seawater (north of 66° N). During April, 60 % of the DMS(g), between 500 and 3000 m originated from Arctic seawater. During July 2014, FLEXPART (FLEXible PARTicle dispersion model) simulations locate the sampled air mass over Baffin Bay and the Canadian Arctic Archipelago 4 days back from the observations. During April 2015, the locations of the air masses 4 days back from sampling were varied: Baffin Bay/Canadian Archipelago, the Arctic Ocean, Greenland and the Pacific Ocean. Our results highlight the role of open water below the flight as the source of DMS(g) during July 2014 and the influence of long-range transport (LRT) of DMS(g) from further afield in the Arctic above 2500 m during April 2015.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".