MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sources of organic aerosols in east China: A modeling study with high-resolution intermediate-volatility and semi-volatile organic compound emissions

2022· dataset· en· W6902056366 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2022
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAerosolCMAQTotal organic carbonEmission inventoryAir pollutionPollutionVolatile organic compoundCarbon fibers

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Organic aerosol (OA) contributes a large fraction of atmospheric submicron aerosol and has negative impacts on air quality, climate, and human health. Sources of OA still remains unclear due to the inadequacy of emission inventory and modeling system. Herein, we established a high-resolution emission inventory of intermediate-volatility and semi-volatile organic compounds (I/SVOCs) and applied it into CMAQ to simulate POA and SOA from different sources in eastern China. Comprehensive observation data of organic carbon (OC), primary and secondary organic aerosol (POA, SOA), and precursors were used for the verification of model performance. With the addition of I/SVOC emissions, OA simulations in each season were substantially improved by increasing the modeled SOA by 1.2 times. I/SVOC emissions contributed 53.6% of SOA and 23.5% of total OA on average. Cooking emissions dominated the POA concentrations in most of the cities. I/SVOC emissions from industrial sources have become the predominant source of regional SOA, followed by those from mobile sources. The differences in OA source contributions between the cities implies that differentiated control measures shall be considered to OA pollution mitigation. Meanwhile, more localized I/SVOCs emission measurements and more sophisticated SOA simulation mechanisms are urgently needed to further improve the identification of OA sources in eastern China.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.166
Threshold uncertainty score0.330

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.231 · 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
GenreDataset

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareFrench-language works237,207