MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4236303875 · doi:10.5194/gmdd-8-9589-2015

Sensitivity of chemical transport model simulations to the duration of chemical and transport operators: a case study with GEOS-Chem v10-01

2015· preprint· en· W4236303875 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sajeev Philip, Randall V. Martin, Christoph A. Keller

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemical transport modelOzoneChemistryTemporal resolutionResolution (logic)Chemical reactionAerosolCarbon monoxideChemical speciesAtmospheric sciencesPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Chemical transport models involve considerable computational expense. Fine temporal resolution offers accuracy at the expense of computation time. Assessment is needed of the sensitivity of simulation accuracy to the duration of chemical and transport operators. We conduct a series of simulations with the GEOS-Chem chemical transport model at different temporal and spatial resolutions to examine the sensitivity of simulated atmospheric composition to temporal resolution. Subsequently, we compare the tracers simulated with operator durations from 10 to 60 min as typically used by global chemical transport models, and identify the timesteps that optimize both computational expense and simulation accuracy. We found that longer transport timesteps increase concentrations of emitted species such as nitrogen oxides and carbon monoxide since a more homogeneous distribution reduces loss through chemical reactions and dry deposition. The increased concentrations of ozone precursors increase ozone production at longer transport timesteps. Longer chemical timesteps decrease sulfate and ammonium but increase nitrate due to feedbacks with in-cloud sulfur dioxide oxidation and aerosol thermodynamics. The simulation duration decreases by an order of magnitude from fine (5 min) to coarse (60 min) temporal resolution. We assess the change in simulation accuracy with resolution by comparing the root mean square difference in ground-level concentrations of nitrogen oxides, ozone, carbon monoxide and secondary inorganic aerosols with a finer temporal or spatial resolution taken as truth. Simulation error for these species increases by more than a factor of 5 from the shortest (5 min) to longest (60 min) temporal resolution. Chemical timesteps twice that of the transport timestep offer more simulation accuracy per unit computation. However, simulation error from coarser spatial resolution generally exceeds that from longer timesteps; e.g. degrading from 2° × 2.5° to 4° × 5° increases error by an order of magnitude. We recommend prioritizing fine spatial resolution before considering different temporal resolutions in offline chemical transport models. We encourage the chemical transport model users to specify in publications the durations of operators due to their effects on simulation accuracy.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols→French-language works237,207→