Black carbon emissions generally underestimated in the global south as revealed by globally distributed measurements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Characterizing black carbon (BC) on a fine scale globally is essential for understanding its climate and health impacts. However, sparse BC mass measurements in different parts of the world and coarse model resolution have inhibited evaluation of global BC emission inventories. Here, we apply globally distributed BC mass measurements from the Surface Particulate Matter Network (SPARTAN) and complementary measurement networks to evaluate contemporary BC emission inventories. We use a global chemical transport model (GEOS-Chem) in its high-performance configuration (GCHP) for high-resolution simulations to relate BC emissions to ambient concentrations for comparison with measurements. Here we find that simulations using the Community Emissions Data System (CEDS) emission inventory exhibit skill (r2 = 0.73) in representing variability in SPARTAN measurements across primarily developed regions with low BC concentrations but exhibit pronounced discrepancy (r2 = 0.00019) across high-BC regions in the Global South, underestimating BC by 38%. Alternative inventories (EDGAR, HTAP) yield similar results. These findings motivate renewed attention to the challenging task of characterizing BC emissions from low- and middle-income countries. Using globally consistent measurements and high-resolution modelling, this study finds that black carbon emissions are generally underestimated in the Global South.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".