MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Data fusion of modelled and measured deposition in the US and Canada, part II: Dry deposition of sulfur, nitrogen and ozone

2025· article· en· W4415891678 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alain Robichaud, Amanda Cole, Irene Cheng, Hazel Cathcart, Jian Feng, Amy Hou, Debora Griffin, Mark W. Shephard

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric Environment · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeposition (geology)OzoneNitrogenAir quality indexParticulatesNitrogen dioxideReactive nitrogen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This study is part of a project which aims to compute the total deposition of sulfur, nitrogen and ozone over both Canada and the US. This initiative is named ADAGIO ( A tmospheric D eposition A nalysis G enerated by I nterpolation of model and O bservations) and is led by Environment and Climate Change Canada. More details about the overall methodology were given in Part I of this project. Similarly, here, a deterministic data fusion methodology is used to combine information from air quality models and surface observations to produce seasonal objective analyses (OAs) for six gas species (O 3 ,SO 2, NO 2 , NO, HNO 3 , NH 3 ) and three dry particulate species (p-NH 4 + , p-NO 3 - , p-SO 4 = ) for multiple years during the period 2010-2019. The main difference in the methodology with PART II is that for dry species, the OAs are obtained for concentration instead of wet deposition measurements. The seasonal dry deposition fluxes and concentrations obtained from air quality model simulations for each species are corrected using the OA concentration fields to obtain the corrected total annual dry deposition. In part II, we focus on the species which contribute the most to the N deposition, that is NO 2, HNO 3 , and NH 3 . ADAGIO yields total dry nitrogen deposition results that are in good agreement with those of the US/TDep project of the US. Comparison with satellite-derived concentrations for NH 3 and NO 2 are also presented and found reasonable. This paper demonstrated that the simple algorithm based on data fusion presented in part I (for wet species) also works for dry species deposition over large territories.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.177
Teacher spread0.168 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueAtmospheric EnvironmentSame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207