MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3045805669 · doi:10.1021/acs.est.0c02251

Isotopic Characterization of Atmospheric Gaseous Elemental Mercury by Passive Air Sampling

2020· article· en· W3045805669 on OpenAlexafffund
Natalie Szponar, David S. McLagan, Robert J. Kaplan, Carl P. J. Mitchell, Frank Wania, A. Steffen, Geoff W. Stupple, Fabrizio Monaci, Bridget A. Bergquist

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistère de l’Environnement, de la Protection de la nature et des Parcs
KeywordsMercury (programming language)Environmental chemistryChemistrySorptionFractionationEnvironmental scienceIsotopeSampling (signal processing)Mass-independent fractionationSorbentAnalytical Chemistry (journal)MineralogyIsotope fractionationAdsorptionChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tracing emission sources and transformations of atmospheric mercury with Hg stable isotopes depends on the ability to collect amounts sufficient for reliable quantification. Commonly employed active sampling methods require power and long pumping times, which limits the ability to deploy in remote locations and at high spatial resolution and can lead to compromised traps. In order to overcome these limitations, we conducted field and laboratory experiments to assess the preservation of isotopic composition during sampling of gaseous elemental mercury (GEM) with a passive air sampler (PAS) that uses a sulfur-impregnated carbon sorbent and a diffusive barrier. Whereas no mass independent fractionation (MIF) was observed during sampling, the mass dependent fractionation (MDF, δ 202 Hg) of GEM taken up by the PAS was lower than that of actively pumped samples by 1.14 ± 0.24‰ (2SD). Because the MDF offset was consistent across field studies and laboratory experiments conducted at 5, 20, and 30 °C, the PAS can be used for reliable isotopic characterization of GEM (±0.3‰ for MDF, ±0.05‰ for MIF, 2SD). The MDF offset occurred more during the sorption of GEM rather than during diffusion. PAS field deployments confirm the ability to record differences in the isotopic composition of GEM (i) with distance from point sources and (ii) sampled at different background locations globally.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations43
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicMercury impact and mitigation studiesFrench-language works237,207