MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2931263589 · doi:10.3390/atmos10040168

A Review of the Representation of Aerosol Mixing State in Atmospheric Models

2019· review· en· W2931263589 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmosphere · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAerosolMixing (physics)Atmospheric sciencesEnvironmental scienceCloud condensation nucleiMeteorologyCondensationClimate modelAtmospheric chemistryClimatologyClimate changePhysicsOzoneGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aerosol mixing state significantly affects concentrations of cloud condensation nuclei (CCN), wet removal rates, thermodynamic properties, heterogeneous chemistry, and aerosol optical properties, with implications for human health and climate. Over the last two decades, significant research effort has gone into finding computationally-efficient methods for representing the most important aspects of aerosol mixing state in air pollution, weather prediction, and climate models. In this review, we summarize the interactions between mixing-state and aerosol hygroscopicity, optical properties, equilibrium thermodynamics and heterogeneous chemistry. We focus on the effects of simplified assumptions of aerosol mixing state on CCN concentrations, wet deposition, and aerosol absorption. We also summarize previous approaches for representing aerosol mixing state in atmospheric models, and we make recommendations regarding the representation of aerosol mixing state in future modelling studies.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.809
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.238 · 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