MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The mobility diameter of soot determines its angular light scattering distribution

2022· article· en· W4308857143 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Georgios A. Kelesidis, Patrizia Crepaldi, Martin Allemann, Aleksandar Đurić, Sotiris E. Pratsinis

Bibliographic record

VenueCombustion and Flame · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersETH Zürich FoundationSiemensCarleton UniversityEidgenössische Technische Hochschule ZürichUniversität HeidelbergStavros Niarchos FoundationSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSootAgglomerateDiscrete dipole approximationScatteringRayleigh scatteringLight scatteringRadiative transferMolecular physicsComputational physicsSingle-scattering albedoRadiative forcingMaterials scienceAerosolChemistryAnalytical Chemistry (journal)PhysicsOpticsCombustionMeteorologyPhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Characterization of soot agglomerates often relies on the angular distribution of their light scattering cross-section, C, that is based on the structure factor exponent, Ds, and asymmetry parameter, g, and depend on agglomerate mobility, dm, and constituent primary particle, dp, size distributions. Here, discrete element modeling is interfaced with discrete dipole approximation to determine C in the range of dm = 60–450 nm with mean dp = 9–26 nm that are most prevalent in fire detection, air pollution and climate change. Increasing dm reduces the effective density, ρeff, and drastically increases Ds and g (by a factor of about 2–20), while increasing dp or its geometric standard deviation increases ρeff but only slightly decreases Ds (10–20%). Thus, the angular light scattering distribution of soot is largely determined by its dm. Currently, rather constant Ds and g are obtained for large agglomerates (dm ≥ 250 nm) by laser diagnostics based on the Rayleigh Debye Gans theory and used in climate models. This overestimates the dm for small soot agglomerates by up to a factor of four and underestimates their radiative forcing efficiency by 10%. So, relations between Ds, g and dm are derived here and validated with data from our premixed flames and literature diffusion flame and field data. These relations cover the evolution of Ds and g with dm and nicely converge to the constant Ds for dm ≥ 250 nm. As such, they can facilitate the characterization of soot agglomerates by light scattering and help to quantify accurately the soot contribution to global warming.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCombustion and FlameSame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207