Air Mass Classification in Coastal New England and its Relationship to Meteorological Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
[1] The dominant air mass types along coastal New England during summer 2004 were classified and their relationship to synoptic meteorological conditions investigated as a component of the International Consortium for Atmospheric Research on Transport and Transformation (ICARTT) campaign. Representative air mass types were defined on the basis of variability in the occurrence of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and they were further grouped into distinct source-related categories. Emissions from nearby anthropogenic sources were found to govern the total variance of the data set (58% at Appledore Island (AI) and 56% at Thompson Farm (TF)), whereas long-distance transport was much less dominant (15% on AI and 17% at TF). This result indicates frequent influence from recent anthropogenic emissions at TF and AI, with periodic inputs of aged/processed pollutants. The fractional time periods dominated by anthropogenic (recent and aged/processed) and marine biogenic air masses were almost the same at TF and AI (36% versus 30% and 14% versus 16% respectively), clearly showing the strong impact of continental outflow on the nearshore marine atmosphere and a surprising persistent influence of marine biogenic emissions at an inland site. Empirical orthogonal function (EOF) analysis suggested that the most important circulation pattern during summer 2004 was characterized by a low trough positioned along coastal New England, leaving this region under the control of northwesterly flow from central Canada. This result helps explain why New England in summer 2004 was less polluted compared to previous years.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".