MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4415021696 · doi:10.5194/acp-25-12629-2025

A diagnostic intercomparison of modeled ozone dry deposition over North America and Europe using AQMEII4 regional-scale simulations

2025· article· en· W4415021696 on OpenAlexaff
Christian Hogrefe, Stefano Galmarini, Paul A. Makar, Ioannis Kioutsioukis, Olivia E. Clifton, Ümmügülsüm Alyüz, Jesse O. Bash, Roberto Bellasio, Roberto Bianconi, Tim Butler, Philip Cheung, Alma Hodžić, Richard van Kranenburg, Aurelia Lupaşcu, Kester Momoh, Juan L. Pérez-Camanyo, Jonathan Pleim, Young-Hee Ryu, Roberto San José, Martijn Schaap, Donna Schwede, Ranjeet Sokhi

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric chemistry and physics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeposition (geology)Grid cellOzoneAir quality indexGridSpatial variabilityScale (ratio)Representation (politics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study analyzes ozone (O3) dry deposition fluxes and velocities (Vd) from twelve regional-scale simulations that were performed over North America and Europe in Phase 4 of the Air Quality Model Evaluation International Initiative (AQMEII4). AQMEII4 collected grid-aggregated and land use (LU)-specific O3 Vd and effective conductances and fluxes for the four major dry deposition pathways. Consistent with recent findings in the AQMEII4 point model intercomparison study, analysis of the grid-aggregated fields shows that grid models with similar Vd can exhibit significant differences in the absolute and relative contributions of the different depositional pathways. Analysis of LU-specific Vd and effective conductances reveals a general increase in model spread compared to grid-aggregated values. This indicates that an analysis of only grid-aggregated deposition diagnostics can mask process-specific differences that exist between schemes. An analysis of AQMEII4 LU distributions across models revealed substantial differences in the spatial patterns and abundance of certain LU categories over both domains, especially for non-forest partially vegetated categories such as agricultural areas, shrubland, and grassland. We demonstrate that these differences can significantly contribute to or even drive differences in LU-specific dry deposition fluxes which can increase the variability in model predictions of ozone. Two recommendations for future deposition-focused modeling studies emerging from the AQMEII4 analyses presented here are to 1) routinely generate diagnostic outputs to advance a process-based understanding of modeled deposition and support impact analyses, and 2) recognize the importance of documenting and analyzing the representation of LU across models and work towards harmonizing this aspect when using air-quality grid models and model ensembles for deposition analyses.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmospheric chemistry and physics→Same topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols→French-language works237,207→