MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2744953615 · doi:10.5194/acp-17-9435-2017

Sources of particulate matter components in the Athabasca oil sands region: investigation through a comparison of trace element measurement methodologies

2017· article· en· W2744953615 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Catherine Phillips-Smith, Cheol–Heon Jeong, Robert M. Healy, Ewa Dąbek-Złotorzyńska, Valbona Celo, Jeffrey R. Brook, Greg J. Evans

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric chemistry and physics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMinistry of the Environment, Conservation and ParksEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversity of Toronto
FundersEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsOil sandsEnvironmental scienceParticulatesTrace elementFilter (signal processing)Biomass burningBiomass (ecology)Hydrology (agriculture)Environmental engineeringMeteorologyAerosolGeologyGeographyEngineeringChemistryArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The province of Alberta, Canada, is home to three oil sands regions which, combined, contain the third largest deposit of oil in the world. Of these, the Athabasca oil sands region is the largest. As part of Environment and Climate Change Canada's program in support of the Joint Canada-Alberta Implementation Plan for Oil Sands Monitoring program, concentrations of trace elements in PM2. 5 (particulate matter smaller than 2.5 µm in diameter) were measured through two campaigns that involved different methodologies: a long-term filter campaign and a short-term intensive campaign. In the long-term campaign, 24 h filter samples were collected once every 6 days over a 2-year period (December 2010–November 2012) at three air monitoring stations in the regional municipality of Wood Buffalo. For the intensive campaign (August 2013), hourly measurements were made with an online instrument at one air monitoring station; daily filter samples were also collected. The hourly and 24 h filter data were analyzed individually using positive matrix factorization. Seven emission sources of PM2. 5 trace elements were thereby identified: two types of upgrader emissions, soil, haul road dust, biomass burning, and two sources of mixed origin. The upgrader emissions, soil, and haul road dust sources were identified through both the methodologies and both methodologies identified a mixed source, but these exhibited more differences than similarities. The second upgrader emissions and biomass burning sources were only resolved by the hourly and filter methodologies, respectively. The similarity of the receptor modeling results from the two methodologies provided reassurance as to the identity of the sources. Overall, much of the PM2. 5-related trace elements were found to be anthropogenic, or at least to be aerosolized through anthropogenic activities. These emissions may in part explain the previously reported higher levels of trace elements in snow, water, and biota samples collected near the oil sands operations.

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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.457

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations59
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmospheric chemistry and physicsSame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207