MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Reactive nitrogen partitioning fuels contribution of Canadian wildfire plumes to U.S. ozone air quality

2024· preprint· en· W4394751862 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Meiyun Lin, Larry W. Horowitz, Lu Hu, Wade Permar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOzoneEnvironmental scienceAir quality indexSmokeReactive nitrogenPlumeAir pollutionAtmospheric sciencesPollutionMeteorologyNitrogenGeographyChemistryGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurately quantifying wildfire impacts on ozone air quality is challenging due to complex physical and chemical processes in wildfire smoke. Here we use measurements from the 2018 WE-CAN aircraft campaign to parameterize emissions of reactive nitrogen (NOy) from wildfires into PAN (37%), NO3- (27%), and NO (36%) in a global chemistry-climate model with 13 km horizontal resolution over the contiguous US. The NOy partitioning, compared with emitting all NOy as NO, reduces model ozone bias in near-fire smoke plumes sampled by the aircraft but significantly enhances ozone downwind when Canadian smoke plumes reach cities in Washington state, Utah, Colorado, and Texas. Using multi-platform observations, we identify the smoke-influenced days with daily maximum 8-h average (MDA8) ozone of 70-85 ppbv in Spokane, Salt Lake City, Denver and Dallas. On these days, mixing of wildfire smoke into urban pollution enhance simulated MDA8 ozone by 10–20 ppbv.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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