MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417434455 · doi:10.1038/s41612-025-01288-2

Mass absorption cross-section of ambient black carbon aerosols - a review

2025· article· en· W4417434455 on OpenAlexafffund
Eija Asmi, Timothy A. Sipkens, Jorge Saturno, John Backman, Konstantina Vasilatou, E. Weingartner, Krzysztof Ciupek, Thomas Müller, Arun Babu Suja, Griša Močnik, Luka Drinovec, Konstantinos Eleftheriadis, Maria I. Gini, Andreas Nowak, Joel C. Corbin

Bibliographic record

Venuenpj Climate and Atmospheric Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
FundersHORIZON EUROPE Framework ProgrammeAcademy of FinlandEuropean CommissionGovernment of Canada
KeywordsCarbon blackAerosolSootAbsorption (acoustics)Mass concentration (chemistry)Sampling (signal processing)Range (aeronautics)Analytical Chemistry (journal)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An accurate assessment of black carbon (BC) climate and health impacts requires knowledge of its mass absorption cross-section (MAC BC ) – a parameter linking optical and mass measurements. The mean MAC BC for freshly emitted soot typically spans a narrow range of 8 ± 1 m 2 g⁻ 1 at 550 nm 1,2 but is modified by subsequent atmospheric aging. Determination of MAC BC requires simultaneous measurements of aerosol light-absorption coefficient ( β abs ) and BC mass. Here, we compile 230 measured MAC BC values from 80 atmospheric studies and explore the effects of sampling location, study duration, instrumentation, and measurement wavelength. The compiled data set shows a broad variability in MAC BC values (a factor of about 200%). We conclude that this variability is attributable to a combination of the above-mentioned effects with additional instrumental uncertainties (e.g., cross-sensitivities and/or inadequate instrument calibration). The current state of knowledge does not support the use of simplistic generalizations or assumptions about MAC BC in the atmosphere, motivating a recommendation to further improve and standardize measurement practices.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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 abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuenpj Climate and Atmospheric ScienceSame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207