MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Comment on egusphere-2024-2226

2024· peer-review· en· W4403745685 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepeer-review
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Exceedances of critical loads for deposition of sulphur (S) and nitrogen (N) to different ecosystems were estimated using European and North American ensembles of air quality models, under Phase 4 of the Air Quality Model Evaluation International Initiative (AQMEII4), to identify where risk of ecosystem harm is expected to occur based on model deposition estimates. The ensembles were driven by common emissions and lateral boundary condition inputs. Model output was regridded to common North American and Europe 0.125° resolution domains, which were then used to calculate critical load exceedances. New, targeted deposition diagnostics implemented in AQMEII4 allowed an unprecedented level of post-simulation analysis to be carried out and facilitated the identification of specific causes of model-to-model variability in critical load exceedance estimates. New datasets for North American critical loads for acidity for forest soil water and aquatic ecosystems were combined with the ensemble deposition predictions to show a substantial decrease in the area and number of locations in exceedance between 2010 and 2016 (forest soils: 13.2 % to 6.1 %; aquatic ecosystems: 21.2 % to 11.4 %). All models agreed in the direction of the ensemble exceedance change between 2010 and 2016. The North American ensemble also predicted a decrease in both severity and total area in exceedance between the years 2010 and 2016 for eutrophication-impacted ecosystems in the USA (sensitive epiphytic lichen: 81.5 % to 75.8 %). The exceedances for herbaceous community richness also decreased between 2010 and 2016, from 13.9 % to 3.9 %. The uncertainty associated with the North American eutrophication results is high; there were sharp differences between the models in both predictions of total N deposition and the change in N deposition, and hence in the predicted eutrophication exceedances between the two years. The European ensemble was used to predict relatively static exceedances of critical loads with respect to acidification (4.48 % to 4.32 % from 2009 to 2010) while eutrophication exceedance increased slightly (60.2 % to 62.2 %). While most models showed the same changes in critical load exceedances as the ensemble between the two years, the spatial extent and magnitude of exceedances varied significantly between the models. The reasons for this variation were examined in detail by first ranking the relative contribution of different sources of sulphur and nitrogen deposition in terms of deposited mass and model-to-model variability in that deposited mass, followed by their analysis using AQMEII4 diagnostics, along with evaluation of the most recent literature. All models in both the North American and European ensembles had net annual negative biases with respect to observed wet deposition of sulphate, nitrate and ammonium. Diagnostics and recent literature suggest that this bias may stem from insufficient cloud scavenging of aerosols and gases, and may be improved through the incorporation of multiphase hydrometeor scavenging within the modelling frameworks. The inability of North American models to predict the timing of the seasonal peak in wet ammonium ion deposition (observed maximum was in April, while all models predicted a June maximum) may also relate to the need for multiphase hydrometeor scavenging (absence of snow scavenging in all models employed here). High variability in the relative importance of particulate sulphate, nitrate and ammonium deposition fluxes between models was linked to the use of updated particle dry deposition parameterizations in some models. However, recent literature and further development of some of the models within the ensemble suggests these particulate biases may also be ameliorated via the incorporation of multiphase hydrometeor scavenging. Annual sulphur and nitrogen deposition prediction variability was linked to SO2 and HNO3 dry deposition parameterizations, and diagnostic analysis showed that the cuticle and soil deposition pathways dominate the deposition mass flux of these species. Further work improving parameterizations for these deposition pathways should reduce variability in model acidifying gas deposition estimates. The absence of base cation chemistry in some models was shown to be a major factor in positive biases in fine mode particulate ammonium and particle nitrate concentrations. Models employing ammonia bidirectional fluxes had both the largest and the smallest magnitude biases, depending on the model and bidirectional flux algorithm employed. A careful analysis of bidirectional flux models suggests that those with poor NH3 performance may underestimate the extent of NH3 emissions fluxes from forested areas. Based on these results, an increased process-research focus is therefore recommended for the following model processes and on observations which may assist in model evaluation and improvement: multiphase hydrometeor scavenging combined with updated particle dry deposition, cuticle and soil deposition pathway algorithms for acidifying gases, base cation chemistry and emissions, and NH3 bidirectional fluxes. Comparisons with satellite observations suggest that oceanic NH3 emissions sources should be included in regional chemical transport models. The choice of land use database employed within any given model was shown to significantly influence deposition totals in several instances, and employing a common land use database across chemical transport models and critical load calculations is recommended for future work.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.286
Threshold uncertainty score0.957

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0260.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2860.217

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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 topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics→French-language works237,207→