Vapors Are Lost to Walls, Not to Particles on the Wall: Artifact-Corrected Parameters from Chamber Experiments and Implications for Global Secondary Organic Aerosol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Atmospheric models of secondary organic aerosol (OA) (SOA) typically rely on parameters derived from environmental chambers. Chambers are subject to experimental artifacts, including losses of (1) particles to the walls (PWL), (2) vapors to the particles on the wall (V2PWL), and (3) vapors to the wall directly (VWL). We present a method for deriving artifact-corrected SOA parameters and translating these to volatility basis set (VBS) parameters for use in chemical transport models (CTMs). Our process involves combining a box model that accounts for chamber artifacts (Statistical Oxidation Model with a TwO-Moment Aerosol Sectional model (SOM-TOMAS)) with a pseudo-atmospheric simulation to develop VBS parameters that are fit across a range of OA mass concentrations. We found that VWL led to the highest percentage change in chamber SOA mass yields (high NO x: 36–680%; low NO x: 55–250%), followed by PWL (high NO x: 8–39%; low NO x: 10–37%), while the effects of V2PWL are negligible. In contrast to earlier work that assumed that V2PWL was a meaningful loss pathway, we show that V2PWL is an unimportant SOA loss pathway and can be ignored when analyzing chamber data. Using our updated VBS parameters, we found that not accounting for VWL may lead surface-level OA to be underestimated by 24% (0.25 μg m −3 ) as a global average or up to 130% (9.0 μg m –3 ) in regions of high biogenic or anthropogenic activity. Finally, we found that accurately accounting for PWL and VWL improves model-measurement agreement for fine mode aerosol mass concentrations (PM 2.5 ) in the GEOS-Chem model.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".