Results from the International Halocarbons in Air Comparison Experiment (IHALACE)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. The International Halocarbons in Air Comparison Experiment (IHALACE) was conducted to document relationships between calibration scales among various laboratories that measure atmospheric greenhouse and ozone depleting gases. Six stainless steel cylinders containing natural and modified natural air samples were circulated among 19 laboratories. Results from this experiment reveal relatively good agreement among commonly used calibration scales for a number of trace gases present in the unpolluted atmosphere at pmol mol−1 (parts per trillion) levels, such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). Some scale relationships were found to be consistent with those derived from bi-lateral experiments or from analysis of atmospheric data, while others revealed discrepancies. The transfer of calibration scales among laboratories was found to be problematic in many cases, meaning that measurements tied to a common scale may not, in fact, be compatible. These results reveal substantial improvements in calibration over previous comparisons. However there is room for improvement in communication and coordination of calibration activities with respect to the measurement of halogenated and related trace gases.
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 | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".