Urban Single Precipitation Events: A Key for Characterizing Sources of Air Contaminants and the Dynamics of Atmospheric Chemistry Exchanges
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The chemistry of atmospheric precipitation serves as an important proxy for discriminating the source(s) of air contaminants in urban environments as well as to discuss the dynamic of atmospheric chemistry exchanges. This approach can be undertaken at time scales varying from single events to seasonal and yearly time frames. Here, we characterized the chemical composition of two single rain episodes (18 July 2018 and 21 February 2019) collected in Wrocław (SW Poland). Our results demonstrated inner variations and seasonality (within the rain event as well as between summer and winter), both in ion concentrations as well as in their potential relations with local air contaminants and scavenging processes. Coupling statistical analysis of chemical parameters with meteorological/synoptic conditions and HYSPLIT back trajectories allowed us to identify three main factors (i.e., principal components; PC) controlling the chemical composition of precipitation, and that these fluctuated during each event: (i) PC1 (40%) was interpreted as reflecting the long-range transport and/or anthropogenic influences of emission sources that included biomass burning, fossil fuel combustion, industrial processes, and inputs of crustal origin; (ii) PC2 (20%) represents the dissolution of atmospheric CO2 and HF into ionic forms; and (iii) PC3 (20%) originates from agricultural activities and/or biomass burning. Time variations during the rain events showed that each factor was more important at the start of the event. The study of both SO42− and Ca2+ concentrations showed that while sea spray inputs fluctuated during both rain events, their overall impact was relatively low. Finally, below-cloud particle scavenging processes were only observed for PM10 at the start of the winter rain episode, which was probably explained by the corresponding low rain intensity and an overlap from local aerosol emissions. Our study demonstrates the importance of multi-time scale approaches to explain the chemical variability in rainwater and both its relation to emission sources and the atmosphere operating processes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".