High sulfur dioxide deposition velocities measured with the flux–gradient technique in a boreal forest in the Alberta Oil Sands Region
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The emission of SO 2 from the Athabasca Oil Sands Region (AOSR) has been shown to impact the surrounding forest area. Recent studies using aircraft-based measurements have demonstrated that deposition of SO 2 to the forest is at a rate many times higher than model estimates. Here we use the flux–gradient method to estimate SO 2 deposition rates at two tower sites in the boreal forest downwind of AOSR SO 2 emissions. We use both continuous and passive sampler measurements and compare the two techniques. The measurements infer SO 2 deposition velocities ranging from 2.1–5.9 cm s −1 (when corrections are applied). There are uncertainties associated with the passive sampler flux–gradient analysis, primarily due to an assumed Schmidt number, a required assumption of independent variables, and potential wind effects. We estimate the total uncertainty as ± 2 cm s −1 . Accounting for these uncertainties, the range of measurements is approximately double the previous aircraft-based measurements (1.2–3.4 cm s −1 ) and more than 10 times higher than model estimates for the same measurement periods (0.1–0.6 cm s −1 ), suggesting that SO 2 in the AOSR has a much shorter lifetime in the atmosphere than is currently predicted by models.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".