Articles | Volume 14, issue 7
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 4731–4750, 2021
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 4731–4750, 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.

Related authors

Source apportionment and sensitivity analysis: two methodologies with two different purposes
Alain Clappier, Claudio A. Belis, Denise Pernigotti, and Philippe Thunis
Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 4245–4256,,, 2017
Short summary

Related subject area

Atmospheric sciences
GCAP 2.0: a global 3-D chemical-transport model framework for past, present, and future climate scenarios
Lee T. Murray, Eric M. Leibensperger, Clara Orbe, Loretta J. Mickley, and Melissa Sulprizio
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 5789–5823,,, 2021
Short summary
Incorporation of volcanic SO2 emissions in the Hemispheric CMAQ (H-CMAQ) version 5.2 modeling system and assessing their impacts on sulfate aerosol over the Northern Hemisphere
Syuichi Itahashi, Rohit Mathur, Christian Hogrefe, Sergey L. Napelenok, and Yang Zhang
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 5751–5768,,, 2021
Short summary
Efficient ensemble generation for uncertain correlated parameters in atmospheric chemical models: a case study for biogenic emissions from EURAD-IM version 5
Annika Vogel and Hendrik Elbern
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 5583–5605,,, 2021
Short summary
Position correction in dust storm forecasting using LOTOS-EUROS v2.1: grid-distorted data assimilation v1.0
Jianbing Jin, Arjo Segers, Hai Xiang Lin, Bas Henzing, Xiaohui Wang, Arnold Heemink, and Hong Liao
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 5607–5622,,, 2021
Short summary
Atmosphere–ocean–aerosol–chemistry–climate model SOCOLv4.0: description and evaluation
Timofei Sukhodolov, Tatiana Egorova, Andrea Stenke, William T. Ball, Christina Brodowsky, Gabriel Chiodo, Aryeh Feinberg, Marina Friedel, Arseniy Karagodin-Doyennel, Thomas Peter, Jan Sedlacek, Sandro Vattioni, and Eugene Rozanov
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 5525–5560,,, 2021
Short summary

Cited articles

Ansari, A. S. and Pandis, S. N.: Response of Inorganic PM to Precursor Concentrations, Environ. Sci. Technol., 32, 2706–2714, 1998. 
ARIA Technologies and ARIANET: Emission Manager – Processing system for model-ready emission input – User's guide, ARIA/ARIANET R2013.19, Milano, Italy, 2013. 
ARIANET: FARM (Flexible Air quality Regional Model) – Model formulation and user manual – Version 4.13, ARIANET R2018.22, Milano, Italy, 2019. 
Belis, C. A., Cancelinha, J., Duane, M., Forcina, V., Pedroni, V., Passarella, R., Tanet, G., Douglas, K., Piazzalunga, A., Bolzacchini, E., Sangiorgi, G., Perrone, M. G., Ferrero, L., Fermo, P., and Larsen, B. R.: Sources for PM air pollution in the Po Plain, Italy: I. Critical comparison of methods for estimating biomass burning contributions to benzo(a)pyrene, Atmos. Environ., 45, 7266–7275, 2011. 
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.