MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3095145466 · doi:10.5194/acp-20-5437-2020

Fourier transform infrared time series of tropospheric HCN in eastern China: seasonality, interannual variability, and source attribution

2020· article· en· W3095145466 on OpenAlexaffabout
Youwen Sun, Cheng Liu, Lin Zhang, Mathias Palm, Justus Notholt, Hao Yin, Corinne Vigouroux, Erik Lutsch, Wei Wang, Changong Shan, Thomas Blumenstock, Tomoo Nagahama, Isamu Morino, Emmanuel Mahieu, Kimberly Strong, Bavo Langerock, Martine De Mazière, Qihou Hu, Huifang Zhang, Christof Petri, Jianguo Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric chemistry and physics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationBelgian Federal Science Policy OfficeFonds De La Recherche Scientifique - FNRSChinese Academy of Meteorological SciencesNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNational Center for Atmospheric ResearchNational Science Foundation
KeywordsTroposphereSeasonalityAtmospheric sciencesEnvironmental scienceClimatologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. We analyzed seasonality and interannual variability of tropospheric hydrogen cyanide (HCN) columns in densely populated eastern China for the first time. The results were derived from solar absorption spectra recorded with a ground-based high-spectral-resolution Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectrometer in Hefei (31∘54′ N, 117∘10′ E) between 2015 and 2018. The tropospheric HCN columns over Hefei, China, showed significant seasonal variations with three monthly mean peaks throughout the year. The magnitude of the tropospheric HCN column peaked in May, September, and December. The tropospheric HCN column reached a maximum monthly mean of (9.8±0.78)×1015 molecules cm−2 in May and a minimum monthly mean of (7.16±0.75)×1015 molecules cm−2 in November. In most cases, the tropospheric HCN columns in Hefei (32∘ N) are higher than the FTIR observations in Ny-Ålesund (79∘ N), Kiruna (68∘ N), Bremen (53∘ N), Jungfraujoch (47∘ N), Toronto (44∘ N), Rikubetsu (43∘ N), Izana (28∘ N), Mauna Loa (20∘ N), La Reunion Maido (21∘ S), Lauder (45∘ S), and Arrival Heights (78∘ S) that are affiliated with the Network for Detection of Atmospheric Composition Change (NDACC). Enhancements of tropospheric HCN column were observed between September 2015 and July 2016 compared to the same period of measurements in other years. The magnitude of the enhancement ranges from 5 % to 46 % with an average of 22 %. Enhancement of tropospheric HCN (ΔHCN) is correlated with the concurrent enhancement of tropospheric CO (ΔCO), indicating that enhancements of tropospheric CO and HCN were due to the same sources. The GEOS-Chem tagged CO simulation, the global fire maps, and the potential source contribution function (PSCF) values calculated using back trajectories revealed that the seasonal maxima in May are largely due to the influence of biomass burning in Southeast Asia (SEAS) (41±13.1 %), Europe and boreal Asia (EUBA) (21±9.3 %), and Africa (AF) (22±4.7 %). The seasonal maxima in September are largely due to the influence of biomass burnings in EUBA (38±11.3 %), AF (26±6.7 %), SEAS (14±3.3 %), and North America (NA) (13.8±8.4 %). For the seasonal maxima in December, dominant contributions are from AF (36±7.1 %), EUBA (21±5.2 %), and NA (18.7±5.2 %). The tropospheric HCN enhancement between September 2015 and July 2016 at Hefei (32∘ N) was attributed to an elevated influence of biomass burnings in SEAS, EUBA, and Oceania (OCE) in this period. In particular, an elevated number of fires in OCE in the second half of 2015 dominated the tropospheric HCN enhancement between September and December 2015. An elevated number of fires in SEAS in the first half of 2016 dominated the tropospheric HCN enhancement between January and July 2016.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.650
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations40
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmospheric chemistry and physicsSame topicAtmospheric Ozone and ClimateFrench-language works237,207