MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1489033298 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511613005.012

Diatoms as indicators of environmental change in antarctic freshwaters

2010· book-chapter· en· W1489033298 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah A. Spaulding, Diane M. McKnight

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2010
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicDiatoms and Algae Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEphemeral keyOceanographyGlacial periodGeologyAntarctic sea iceCryosphereIce sheetPhysical geographyGeographyEcologySea iceGeomorphologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction The Antarctic continent holds the majority of the earth's freshwater in the form of ice. However, life is dependent upon liquid water, which is scarce in Antarctica. Less than 5% of the continent is ice-free, and it is within these ice-free regions that freshwater lakes and ephemeral streams form by the melting of glacial ice. Ice-free regions are located primarily near the Antarctic coastline (Fig. 11.1). Of these regions, the ‘desert oases’ of East Antarctica are considered to be the coldest, driest regions on earth. Within the limited sites where liquid freshwater is found, life is present. Cyanobacteria are the most widely distributed and abundant freshwater organisms, forming mats in lakes, ponds, and meltwater streams and on moist soils. Higher plants occur only in lower latitudes of the Antarctic Peninsula. Diatoms are found in nearly all types of Antarctic waters, and are one of few organisms that are well preserved as fossils. In this chapter, we review the investigations to date in Antarctica concerning the application of diatoms to problems of environmental change. Antarctic diatoms The study of freshwater algae in Antarctica began with early expeditions to the most accessible subantarctic and maritime islands of Kerguelen and South Georgia (Reinsch, 1890; Carlson, 1913). The flora of Kerguelen has been the most studied of any of the Antarctic regions (Bourrelly & Manguin, 1954; Germain & Le Cohu, 1981; Le Cohu, 1981; Le Cohu & Maillard, 1983, 1986; Riaux-Gobin, 1994).

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations37
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicDiatoms and Algae ResearchFrench-language works237,207