Articles | Volume 14, issue 7
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 4731–4750, 2021
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-4731-2021
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 4731–4750, 2021
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-4731-2021

Model experiment description paper 29 Jul 2021

Model experiment description paper | 29 Jul 2021

Comparison of source apportionment approaches and analysis of non-linearity in a real case model application

Claudio A. Belis et al.

Viewed

Total article views: 849 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total Supplement BibTeX EndNote
630 204 15 849 65 3 8
  • HTML: 630
  • PDF: 204
  • XML: 15
  • Total: 849
  • Supplement: 65
  • BibTeX: 3
  • EndNote: 8
Views and downloads (calculated since 16 Feb 2021)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 16 Feb 2021)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 600 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 600 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Latest update: 22 Oct 2021
Download
Short summary
The study presents an in-depth analysis of the implications that using different CTM source apportionment approaches (tagged species and brute force) have for the source allocation of secondary inorganic aerosol, an important component of PM10 and PM2.5. A set of runs combining different emission levels and models was carried out, aiming to describe the situations in which strong non-linearity may lead the two approaches to deliver different results and when they are expected to be comparable.