MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7100825119

2006. Analysis of ambient air quality trends at selected West Central Airshed Society stations: Tomahawk and Carrot Creek. To be presented at: Canadian Society for Civil Engineering 2006 Annual General Conference

2006· article· en· W7100825119 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPercentileAir quality indexBenchmark (surveying)Quality (philosophy)PollutantStatistical analysisAir pollution
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: This paper presents an evaluation of ambient air trends using data from two West Central Airshed Society monitoring stations in rural Alberta. Pollutants studied include O3, NO2, SO2, and PM2.5. Two approaches were examined to assess trends: (a) use of various percentiles of hourly concentration distributions from each year (50th to 98th percentiles), and (b) use of frequencies (number of hours) in which various benchmark concentrations were exceeded each year. Assuming these summary statistics to be linear in time, hypothesis tests (at = 0.05) were conducted on the best-fit lines to check whether slope of the lines was zero or not in order to indicate change. Results from these approaches clearly supported each other. At one station – Tomahawk – no statistically significant change was detected in air quality with respect to O3 and PM2.5, while SO2 and NO2 showed statistically significant decreasing trends. At the second station – Carrot Creek – SO2 exhibited statistically significant decreasing trends, while O3 and NO2 showed no change. The decreasing trends observed with SO2 at the two stations appear to be consistent with reduced natural gas flaring and venting that has been occurring in Alberta over the same time period. The period of study over which trends were examined was short – less than a decade – and changes or lack of changes observed do not necessarily provide an indication of what may happen over the long term.

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 score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.186

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.211 · 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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols→French-language works237,207→