A CRITERION FOR EVALUATION OF THE VALIDITY OF BLACK CARBON REFRACTIVE INDEX FROM MEASUREMENTS OF LIGHT ABSORPTION IN THE VISIBLE AND NEAR-INFRARED
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The fractal-like black carbon particles emitted from combustion systems and biomass burning are short-lived pollutants that contribute significantly to climate forcing. To accurately quantify the forcing and interpret optical measurements of uncoated and coated black carbon (BC) particles, it is indispensable to know the refractive index m = n + ki of BC in the visible and near infrared. In this study the effects of various morphological parameters and structure defects of black carbon particles on their mass absorption cross section (MAC) were first investigated using the generalized Mie-solution method (GMM) and discrete dipole approximation (DDA). The accuracy of the Rayleigh-Debye-Gans (RDG) approximation is also evaluated. Based on recent measurements of the soot absorption function E(m) and freshly emitted BC MAC in the visible and near-infrared, the most probable range of E(m) was recommended. A criterion was proposed to determine the valid range of refractive index of freshly emitted BC based on the contour plot of E(m) on the n-k plane.
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 | 0.008 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".