MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2797963004 · doi:10.5194/acp-2018-159

Production of particulate brown carbon during atmospheric aging of wood-burning emissions

2018· article· en· W2797963004 on OpenAlexaff
N. Kumar, Joel C. Corbin, Emily A. Bruns, Dario Massabò, Jay G. Slowik, Luka Drinovec, Griša Močnik, P. Prati, Athanasia Vlachou, Urs Baltensperger, Martin Gysel‐Beer, Imad El Haddad, Andrê S. H. Prévôt

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicFlame retardant materials and properties
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarbon blackAerosolCarbon fibersAbsorbanceAbsorption (acoustics)ChemistryTotal organic carbonMass fractionMass concentration (chemistry)ParticulatesCombustionAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Environmental chemistryMaterials scienceOrganic chemistryComposite materialChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. We investigate the optical properties of light-absorbing organic carbon (brown carbon) from domestic wood combustion as a function of simulated atmospheric aging. At shorter wavelengths, light absorption by brown carbon from primary organic aerosol (POA) and secondary organic aerosol (SOA) formed during aging was around 10 % and 20 %, respectively, of the total aerosol absorption (brown carbon plus black carbon). The mass absorption cross-section (MAC) determined for black carbon (BC, 13.7 m2 g−1 (geometric standard deviation GSD = 1.1) at 370 nm) was consistent with that recommended by Bond et al. (2006). The corresponding MAC of POA (5.5 m2 g−1 (GSD = 1.2)) was higher than that of SOA (2.4 m2 g−1 (GSD = 1.3)) at 370 nm. However, SOA presents a substantial mass fraction, with a measured average SOA / POA mass ratio after aging of ~ 5 and therefore contributes significantly to the overall light absorption, highlighting the importance of wood-combustion SOA as a source of atmospheric brown carbon. The wavelength dependence of POA and SOA light absorption between 370 nm and 660 nm is well described with absorption Ångström exponents of 4.6 and 5.6, respectively. UV-visible absorbance measurements of water and methanol-extracted OA were also performed showing that the majority of the light-absorbing OA is water insoluble even after aging.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.756

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations14
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFlame retardant materials and propertiesFrench-language works237,207