MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6901998511 · doi:10.60810/openumwelt-523

Progress in Nitrogen Deposition Monitoring and Modelling

2014· other· en· W6901998511 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpenUMWELT · 2014
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeposition (geology)Flux (metallurgy)NitrogenAmmoniaReactive nitrogenNitrogen dioxideAir pollution

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The chapter reviews progress in monitoring and modelling of atmospheric nitrogen (N) deposition at regional and global scales. The Working Group expressed confidence in the inorganic N wet deposition estimates in U.S., eastern Canada, Europe and parts of East Asia. But, long-term wet or dry N deposition information in large parts of Asia, South America, parts of Africa, Australia/Oceania, and oceans and coastal areas is lacking. Presently, robust estimates are only available for inorganic N as existing monitoring generally does not measure the complete suite of N species, impeding the closing of the atmospheric N budget. The most important species not routinely measured are nitrogen dioxide (NO2), ammonia (NH3), organic N and nitric acid (HNO3). Uncertainty is much higher in dry deposition than in wet deposition estimates. Inferential modelling (combining air concentrations with exchange rates) and direct flux measurements are good tools to estimate dry deposition; however, they are not widely applied. There is a lack of appropriate parameterizations for different land uses and compounds for input into inferential models. There is also a lack of direct dry deposition flux measurements to test inferential models and atmospheric model estimates. Quelle: http://link.springer.com

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.005

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.257 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpenUMWELT→French-language works237,207→