MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4401368546 · doi:10.1029/2024gl109369

Reactive Nitrogen Partitioning Enhances the Contribution of Canadian Wildfire Plumes to US Ozone Air Quality

2024· article· en· W4401368546 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Meiyun Lin, Larry W. Horowitz, Lu Hu, Wade Permar

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOffice of Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive ResearchNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsOzoneAir quality indexEnvironmental scienceReactive nitrogenAtmospheric sciencesNitrogenNitrogen oxidesMeteorologyNitrogen dioxideClimatologyGeologyChemistryGeographyWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Quantifying the variable impacts of wildfire smoke on ozone air quality is challenging. Here we use airborne measurements from the 2018 Western Wildfire Experiment for Cloud Chemistry, Aerosol Absorption, and Nitrogen (WE‐CAN) to parameterize emissions of reactive nitrogen (NO y ) from wildfires into peroxyacetyl nitrate (PAN; 37%), NO 3 − (27%), and NO (36%) in a global chemistry‐climate model with 13 km spatial resolution over the contiguous US. The NO y partitioning, compared with emitting all NO y as NO, reduces model ozone bias in near‐fire smoke plumes sampled by the aircraft and enhances ozone downwind by 5–10 ppbv when Canadian smoke plumes travel to Washington, Utah, Colorado, and Texas. Using multi‐platform observations, we identify the smoke‐influenced days with daily maximum 8‐hr average (MDA8) ozone of 70–88 ppbv in Kennewick, Salt Lake City, Denver and Dallas. On these days, wildfire smoke enhanced MDA8 ozone by 5–25 ppbv, through ozone produced remotely during plume transport and locally via interactions of smoke plume with urban emissions.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.148
Threshold uncertainty score0.298

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.310
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations14
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research Letters→Same topicFire effects on ecosystems→French-language works237,207→