Geoscientific Model Development
Geoscientific Model Development
GMD
Articles | Volume 14, issue 7
Articles | Volume 14, issue 7
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-4731-2021
© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-4731-2021
© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Articles | Volume 14, issue 7
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, Guido Pirovano, Maria Gabriella Villani, Giuseppe Calori, Nicola Pepe, and Jean Philippe Putaud

Viewed

Total article views: 2,702 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total Supplement BibTeX EndNote
1,682 932 88 2,702 314 81 132
  • HTML: 1,682
  • PDF: 932
  • XML: 88
  • Total: 2,702
  • Supplement: 314
  • BibTeX: 81
  • EndNote: 132
Views and downloads (calculated since 16 Feb 2021)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 16 Feb 2021)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 2,702 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 2,392 with geography defined and 310 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Latest update: 06 Dec 2025
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.
Read more
Share