MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003314233 · doi:10.3390/atmos11020156

Current State of Atmospheric Aerosol Thermodynamics and Mass Transfer Modeling: A Review

2020· review· en· W3003314233 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 · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAerosolAir quality indexEnvironmental scienceParticle (ecology)NucleationMass transferChemistryAtmospheric sciencesThermodynamicsMeteorologyPhysicsGeologyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A useful aerosol model must be able to adequately resolve the chemical complexity and phase state of the wide particle size range arising from the many different secondary aerosol growth processes to assess their environmental and health impacts. Over the past two decades, significant advances in understanding of gas-aerosol partitioning have occurred, particularly with respect to the role of organic compounds, yet aerosol representations have changed little in air quality and climate models since the late 1990s and early 2000s. The gas-aerosol partitioning models which are still commonly used in air quality models are separate inorganics-only thermodynamics and secondary organic aerosol (SOA) formation based on absorptive partitioning theory with an assumption of well-mixed liquid-like particles that continuously maintain equilibrium with the gas phase. These widely used approaches in air quality models for secondary aerosol composition and growth based on separated inorganic and organic processes are inadequate. This review summarizes some of the important developments during the past two decades in understanding of gas aerosol mass transfer processes. Substantial increases in computer performance in the last decade justify increasing the process detail in aerosol models. Organics play a central role during post-nucleation growth into the accumulation mode and change the hygroscopic properties of sulfate aerosol. At present, combined inorganic-organic aerosol thermodynamics models are too computationally expensive to be used online in 3-D simulations without high levels of aggregation of organics into a small number of functional surrogates. However, there has been progress in simplified modeling of liquid-liquid phase separation (LLPS) and distinct chemical regimes within organic-rich and inorganic-rich phases. Additional limitations of commonly used thermodynamics models are related to lack of surface tension data for various aerosol compositions in the small size limit, and lack of a comprehensive representation of surface interaction terms such as disjoining pressure in the Gibbs free energy which become significant in the small size limit and which affect both chemical composition and particle growth. As a result, there are significant errors in modeling of hygroscopic growth and phase transitions for particles in the nucleation and Aitken modes. There is also increasing evidence of reduced bulk diffusivity in viscous organic particles and, therefore, traditional secondary organic aerosol models, which are typically based on the assumption of instantaneous equilibrium gas-particle partitioning and neglect the kinetic effects, are no longer tenable.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.941
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.230 · 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