MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2761901434 · doi:10.1002/2017jd027676

Can We Monitor Snow Properties on Sea Ice to Investigate Its Role in Tropospheric Ozone Depletion?

2017· article· en· W2761901434 on OpenAlexaff
Florent Dominé

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalMakivik Corporation
FundersInstitut Polaire Français Paul Emile VictorGeorg-August-Universität Göttingen
KeywordsSnowBromineSnowmeltTroposphereOzoneEnvironmental scienceAtmospheric sciencesArcticOzone depletionTropospheric ozoneClimatologyMeteorologyChemistryOceanographyGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the lower troposphere over the Arctic Ocean, ozone is often destroyed in spring by chemical chain reactions involving the reactive bromine species Br and BrO. The role of surface snow in generating reactive bromine has been suspected, but many details of the processes not understood. Using unique data such as BrO concentrations from instruments on buoys, Burd et al. (2017, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD026906) observed that the snowmelt onset date often coincides with the end of the reactive bromine season. They proposed that the decrease in snow‐specific surface area and/or the occurrence of liquid water in snow induced by melting dramatically slows the rate of surface reactions generating bromine, indicating that the physical state of the snow is critical for bromine generation. Their suggestion is discussed, and a method to test it using novel instrumentation recently available is proposed.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.249 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres→Same topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols→French-language works237,207→