MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4304165756 · doi:10.5194/acp-2022-656

Aerosol deposition to the boreal forest in the vicinity of the Alberta Oil Sands

2022· preprint· en· W4304165756 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Timothy Jiang, Mark Gordon, Paul A. Makar, Ralf M. Staebler, Michael Wheeler

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaYork University
FundersEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
KeywordsAerosolFlux (metallurgy)Deposition (geology)Atmospheric sciencesEnvironmental scienceEddy covarianceParticle sizeOil sandsMixing ratioParticle (ecology)Particle-size distributionChemistryMaterials scienceMeteorologyStructural basinGeologyAsphaltEcosystemGeographyGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Measurements of size-resolved aerosol concentration and fluxes were made in a forest in the Athabasca Oil Sands Region (AOSR) of Alberta, Canada in August 2021 with the aim of investigating a) particle size distributions from different sources, b) size-resolved particle deposition velocities, and c) the rate of vertical mixing in the canopy. Particle size distributions were attributed to different sources determined by wind direction. Background air from undeveloped forested areas air showed a peak number concentration for diameters near 70 nm while air mixed with upgrader smokestack plumes had higher number concentrations with peak number between diameters of 70 and 80 nm. Aerosols from the direction of open-pit mine faces showed number concentration peaks near 150 nm and volume distribution peaks near 250 nm (with secondary peaks near 600 nm). Size-resolved deposition fluxes were calculated which show good agreement with previous measurements and a recent parameterization. There is a minimum deposition velocity of vd = 0.02 cm s-1 for particles of 80 nm diameter; however, there is a large amount of variation in the measurements and this value is not significantly different from zero in the 68 % confidence interval. Finally, gradient measurements of PM1 demonstrated nighttime decoupling of air within and above the forest canopy, with median lag times at night of up to 40 min, and lag times between 2 and 5 min during the day. PM1 fluxes determined using flux/gradient methods (with different diffusion parameterizations) underestimate the flux magnitude relative to eddy covariance flux measurements when averaged over the nearly 1-month measurement period. However, there is significant uncertainty in the averages determined using the flux/gradient method.

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 score0.908
Threshold uncertainty score0.184

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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