MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1567677637 · doi:10.1029/2012gl054118

Direct ventilation of the North Pacific did not reach the deep ocean during the last deglaciation

2012· article· en· W1567677637 on OpenAlexaff
Samuel L. Jaccard, Eric D. Galbraith

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeglaciationSubarctic climateGeologyOceanographyDeep waterCircumpolar deep waterDeep seaStadialPacific oceanHoloceneNorth Atlantic Deep Water

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Despite its tremendous size, the deep North Pacific has received relatively little attention by paleoceanographers. It was recently suggested that the deep North Pacific was directly ventilated by dense waters formed in the subarctic Pacific during Heinrich Stadial 1 (HS1) of the early deglaciation. Here we present new redox‐sensitive trace metal data from a sediment core at 2393 m in the subarctic Pacific, in comparison with previously published data from elsewhere in the region. The combined picture shows no sign of ventilation during the early deglaciation in any available core from water depths of 2393 m and deeper, while the deepest core to display clear signs of enhanced ventilation during HS1 was raised from 1366 m water depth. Thus, it appears likely that, although the North Pacific was well ventilated to intermediate depths during HS1, the deep ocean did not receive a significant input of dense waters from a local source, but remained isolated from the surface waters above.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations66
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207