MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ocean Outgassing of Methyl Chloroform as an Underestimated Source of Emission

2025· preprint· en· W4413157144 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peidong Wang, Susan Solomon, Jeffery R. Scott, S. A. Yvon‐Lewis, P. O. Wennberg, Ray F. Weiss, Matthew Rigby, Minde An

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilNuclear Safety and Security CommissionMassachusetts Green High Performance Computing CenterNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsOutgassingChloroformAstrobiologyEnvironmental sciencePhysicsChemistryAstronomyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Methyl chloroform (MCF) is a synthetic ozone-depleting substance used as an industrial solvent. Its primary sink is reaction with the hydroxyl radical (OH), making it a key tracer for estimating atmospheric oxidative capacity. Following Montreal Protocol regulations, MCF emissions declined rapidly after the 1990s. However, the recent slowdown in atmospheric MCF decay suggests persistent emissions and/or declining OH (contradicting chemistry-climate models projecting increasing OH). The air-sea exchange of MCF has been poorly constrained due to limited observations and simplified ocean representations. We simulate oceanic MCF fluxes using a modern ocean reanalysis and validate with depth-resolved observations. Results suggest the ocean has shifted from a net sink to a net source around 2005, outgassing 0.5 Gg yr-1 in the 2010s (up to 30% of inferred MCF emissions). This ocean outgas is an order of magnitude larger than previous estimates and can have important implications for interpreting OH levels from MCF records.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.508
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.323
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWater Quality Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207