MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6922227002 · doi:10.11575/prism/35405

Ubiquity of ClNO2 in the urban boundary layer of Calgary, AB, Canada

2015· other· en· W6922227002 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Calgary · 2015
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMixing ratioYield (engineering)NitrateAir mass (solar energy)Mixing (physics)OzoneChlorineNitrogen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The role of nitryl chloride (ClNO2) as a nocturnal nitrogen oxide reservoir species and chlorine atom precursor is well established for polluted coastal areas, but its role at mid-continental locations is less clear. In this manuscript, intermittent measurements over the course of several seasons of ClNO2 mixing ratios by iodide ion chemical ionization mass spectrometry (CIMS) in Calgary, AB, Canada, are presented. Mixing ratios were highly variable between nights and seasons and depended on the abundances of precursors and meteorological conditions. The lowest ClNO2 mixing ratios (nocturnal maximum of 30 parts-per-trillion by volume, pptv) were observed in the summer, rationalized by losses of the nitrate radical (NO3) that were more efficient than in the other months. Higher ClNO2 mixing ratios (up to 330 pptv) were observed in the winter and spring months, but varied between nights. In the fall, ClNO2 mixing ratios increased from night to night following the application of salt to roads. The ClNO2 yield relative to the amount of NO3 produced from oxidation of NO2 by O3 ranged from 0.1% to 4.5% (10th and 90th percentiles; median 1.0%). The ClNO2 yield relative to consumed N2O5 consumed by heterogeneous reactions was estimated using a time-integrated box model and ranged from 0.5% to 12.1% (10th and 90th percentiles; median 3.4%). The ubiquity of ClNO2 implies that the Cl atom needs to be considered as an oxidant in high-latitude urban environments in winter.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of CalgaryFrench-language works237,207