MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7073553619

Source attribution of Arctic black carbon constrained by aircraft and surface measurements

2017· article· en· W7073553619 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCU Scholar (University of Colorado Boulder) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicHigh-pressure geophysics and materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsArcticThe arcticCarbon fibersCarbon blackSurface (topology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Black carbon (BC) contributes to Arctic warming, yet sources of Arctic BC and their geographic contributions remain uncertain.We interpret a series of recent airborne (NETCARE 2015; PAMARCMiP 2009 and 2011 campaigns) and ground-based measurements (at Alert, Barrow and Ny-Ålesund) from multiple methods (thermal, laser incandescence and light absorption) with the GEOS-Chem global chemical transport model and its adjoint to attribute the sources of Arctic BC.This is the first comparison with a chemical transport model of refractory BC (rBC) measurements at Alert.The springtime airborne measurements performed by the NETCARE campaign in 2015 and the PA-MARCMiP campaigns in 2009 and 2011 offer BC vertical profiles extending to above 6 km across the Arctic and include profiles above Arctic ground monitoring stations.Our simulations with the addition of seasonally varying domestic heating and of gas flaring emissions are consistent with ground-based measurements of BC concentrations at Alert and Barrow in winter and spring (rRMSE < 13 %) and with airborne measurements of the BC vertical profile across the Arctic (rRMSE = 17 %) except for an underestimation in the middle troposphere (500-700 hPa).Sensitivity simulations suggest that anthropogenic emissions in eastern and southern Asia have the largest effect on the Arctic BC column burden both in spring (56 %) and annu-ally (37 %), with the largest contribution in the middle troposphere (400-700 hPa).Anthropogenic emissions from northern Asia contribute considerable BC (27 % in spring and 43 % annually) to the lower troposphere (below 900 hPa).Biomass burning contributes 20 % to the Arctic BC column annually.At the Arctic surface, anthropogenic emissions from northern Asia (40-45 %) and eastern and southern Asia (20-40 %) are the largest BC contributors in winter and spring, followed by Europe (16-36 %).Biomass burning from North America is the most important contributor to all stations in summer, especially at Barrow.Our adjoint simulations indicate pronounced spatial heterogeneity in the contribution of emissions to the Arctic BC column concentrations, with noteworthy contributions from emissions in eastern China (15 %) and western Siberia (6.5 %).Although uncertain, gas flaring emissions from oilfields in western Siberia could have a striking impact (13 %) on Arctic BC loadings in January, comparable to the total influence of continental Europe and North America (6.5 % each in January).Emissions from as far as the Indo-Gangetic Plain could have a substantial influence (6.3 % annually) on Arctic BC as well.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.196

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.014

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 head0.206
Teacher spread0.185 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueCU Scholar (University of Colorado Boulder)Same topicHigh-pressure geophysics and materialsFrench-language works237,207