MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4239934088 · doi:10.5194/acp-2018-629

Airborne and ground-based observations of ammonium nitratedominated aerosols in a shallow boundary layer during intense winterpollution episodes in northern Utah

2018· preprint· en· W4239934088 on OpenAlexafffund
Alessandro Franchin, D. L. Fibiger, Lexie Goldberger, Erin E. McDuffie, Alexander Moravek, Caroline C. Womack, Erik T. Crosman, Kenneth S. Docherty, W. P. Dubé, Sebastian W. Hoch, Ben H. Lee, Russell Long, J. G. Murphy, Joel A. Thornton, Steven S. Brown, Munkhbayar Baasandorj, A. M. Middlebrook

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsAerosolNitrateAmmoniumEnvironmental chemistrySulfatePollutionAtmospheric sciencesMass concentration (chemistry)Environmental scienceParticulatesChemistryChemical compositionAmmonium nitrateGeologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Airborne and ground-based measurements of aerosol concentrations, chemical composition and gas phase precursors were obtained in three valleys in northern Utah (U.S.A.). The measurements were part of the Utah Winter Fine Particulate Study (UWFPS) that took place in January–February, 2017. Total aerosol mass concentrations of PM1 were measured from a Twin Otter aircraft, with an Aerosol Mass Spectrometer (AMS). PM1 concentrations ranged from less than 2 μg m−3 during clean periods to over 100 μg m−3 during the most polluted episodes, consistent with PM2.5 total mass concentrations measured concurrently at ground sites. Across the entire region, increases in total aerosol mass above ~ 2 μg m−3 were associated with increases in the ammonium nitrate mass fraction, clearly indicating that the highest aerosol mass loadings in the region were predominantly attributable to an increase in ammonium nitrate. The chemical composition was regionally homogenous for total aerosol mass concentrations above 17.5 μg m−3, with 74 ± 5 % (average ± standard deviation) ammonium nitrate, 18 ± 3 % organic material, 6 ± 3 % ammonium sulfate, and 2 ± 2 % ammonium chloride. Vertical profiles of aerosol mass and volume in the region showed variable concentrations with height in the polluted boundary layer. Higher average mass concentrations were observed within the first few hundred meters above ground level in all three valleys during pollution episodes. Gas phase measurements of nitric acid (HNO3) and ammonia (NH3) during the pollution episodes revealed that in Cache and Utah Valley, partitioning of inorganic semi-volatiles to the aerosol phase was usually limited by the amount of gas phase nitric acid, with NH3 being in excess. The inorganic species were compared with the ISORROPIA thermodynamic model. Total inorganic aerosol mass concentrations were calculated for various decreases of total nitrate and total ammonium. For pollution episodes, our simulations of a 50 % decrease in total nitrate lead to a 46 ± 3 % decrease in total PM1 mass. A simulated 50 % decrease in total ammonium lead to a 36 ± 17% µg m−3 in total PM1 mass, over the entire area of the study. Despite some differences among different locations, our results also showed a higher sensitivity to decreasing nitric acid concentrations and the importance of ammonia at the lowest total nitrate conditions. In the Salt Lake Valley, both HNO3 and NH3 concentrations controlled aerosol formation.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.166
Threshold uncertainty score0.330

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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