MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376470393 · doi:10.1525/elementa.2022.00129

Modelling the coupled mercury-halogen-ozone cycle in the central Arctic during spring

2023· article· en· W4376470393 on OpenAlexaff
Shaddy Ahmed, Jennie L. Thomas, Hélène Angot, Aurélien Dommergue, Stephen D. Archer, Ludovic Bariteau, Ivo Beck, Nuria Benavent, Anne‐Marlene Blechschmidt, Byron Blomquist, Matthew Boyer, Jesper Heile Christensen, Sandro Dahlke, Ashu Dastoor, Detlev Helmig, Dean Howard, Hans‐Werner Jacobi, Tuija Jokinen, Rémy Lapere, Tiia Laurila, Lauriane L. J. Quéléver, Andreas Richter, Andrei Ryjkov, Anoop S. Mahajan, Louis Marelle, Katrine Aspmo Pfaffhuber, Kevin Posman, Annette Rinke, Alfonso Saiz‐Lopez, Julia Schmale, Henrik Skov, A. Steffen, Geoff W. Stupple, J. Stutz, Oleg Travnikov, Bianca Zilker

Bibliographic record

VenueElementa Science of the Anthropocene · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersBiological and Environmental ResearchOffice of ScienceGrand Équipement National De Calcul IntensifU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsMercury (programming language)SnowArcticOzoneEnvironmental chemistryOzone depletionEnvironmental scienceBromineAtmospheric sciencesChemistryClimatologyMeteorologyOceanographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Near-surface mercury and ozone depletion events occur in the lowest part of the atmosphere during Arctic spring. Mercury depletion is the first step in a process that transforms long-lived elemental mercury to more reactive forms within the Arctic that are deposited to the cryosphere, ocean, and other surfaces, which can ultimately get integrated into the Arctic food web. Depletion of both mercury and ozone occur due to the presence of reactive halogen radicals that are released from snow, ice, and aerosols. In this work, we added a detailed description of the Arctic atmospheric mercury cycle to our recently published version of the Weather Research and Forecasting model coupled with Chemistry (WRF-Chem 4.3.3) that includes Arctic bromine and chlorine chemistry and activation/recycling on snow and aerosols. The major advantage of our modelling approach is the online calculation of bromine concentrations and emission/recycling that is required to simulate the hourly and daily variability of Arctic mercury depletion. We used this model to study coupling between reactive cycling of mercury, ozone, and bromine during the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) spring season in 2020 and evaluated results compared to land-based, ship-based, and remote sensing observations. The model predicts that elemental mercury oxidation is driven largely by bromine chemistry and that particulate mercury is the major form of oxidized mercury. The model predicts that the majority (74%) of oxidized mercury deposited to land-based snow is re-emitted to the atmosphere as gaseous elemental mercury, while a minor fraction (4%) of oxidized mercury that is deposited to sea ice is re-emitted during spring. Our work demonstrates that hourly differences in bromine/ozone chemistry in the atmosphere must be considered to capture the springtime Arctic mercury cycle, including its integration into the cryosphere and ocean.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.369
Threshold uncertainty score0.924

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations15
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElementa Science of the AnthropoceneSame topicMercury impact and mitigation studiesFrench-language works237,207