Apportionment of Amagasaki
Amagasaki, Japan, is apportioned easily and straightforwardly. The steps are summarized in the table below, with links for express viewing.
|Amagasaki, Japan, 20 elements|
|Step 0||Nothing chosen|
|Step 2||Sea and crust (FEC) chosen, fit 9.18|
|Step 3||Osaka added, fit 1.52|
|Step 4||Kawasaki added, fit 0.96|
|Step 5||Mallipo (May) added, fit 0.73|
|Step 6||Nagoya added, fit 0.49|
|Step 7||Osaka deleted, fit 0.52|
Step 0, shown below, is before any signatures are chosen. The geographical cluster of sources in Japan and Korea are clearly the best candidates to begin with.
Step 2 is after the sea and the far east crust (FEC) are chosen. Japan and Korea remain the best matches.
Step 3 is adding Osaka, the best fit from Japan/Korea, to the apportionment. Nearly everything else collapses (because Osaka represents it reasonably), except for one or two signatures from JK and several minor ones from North America and the Atlantic. Since the fit is not yet satisfactory (1.52), we continue.
Step 4 enters the best remaining source from JK, which is Kawasaki, another Japanese city. This reduces the fit to 0.96 and raises the F-ratios of a host of other signatures from other regions, most of whose coefficients are negative.
Step 5 enters the best remaining source from Japan and Korea, which is Mallipo, a site on the west coast of South Korea. This improves the fit to 0.73 and reduces the F-ratios of the remaining sources still further. It also introduces another possible nearby source, Nagoya.
Step 6 adds Nagoya. It improves the fit to 0.49 but gives the earlier Osaka a very small coefficient.
Step 7 drops Osaka because of its negligibly small coefficient. This decreases the fit slightly, to 0.52. The fitting process stops here because this level of fit is quite satisfactory.
Our conclusion is that the aerosol of Amagasaki is explained satisfactorily by three sources in Japan and Korea (Nagoya, Kawasaki, Mallipo), in addition to sea and crust.
Back to Tracer System