MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1591289697 · doi:10.1029/2010gl045565

Mapping permeability over the surface of the Earth

2011· article· en· W1591289697 on OpenAlexaff
Tom Gleeson, Leslie Smith, Nils Moosdorf, Jens Hartmann, Hans H. Dürr, Andrew H. Manning, M. Jellinek

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersU.S. Geological SurveyDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsGeologyEarth (classical element)Permeability (electromagnetism)GeophysicsEarth surfaceAstrobiologyPhysicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

[1] Permeability, the ease of fluid flow through porous rocks and soils, is a fundamental but often poorly quantified component in the analysis of regional-scale water fluxes. Permeability is difficult to quantify because it varies over more than 13 orders of magnitude and is heterogeneous and dependent on flow direction. Indeed, at the regional scale, maps of permeability only exist for soil to depths of 1–2 m. Here we use an extensive compilation of results from hydrogeologic models to show that regional-scale (>5 km) permeability of consolidated and unconsolidated geologic units below soil horizons (hydrolithologies) can be characterized in a statistically meaningful way. The representative permeabilities of these hydrolithologies are used to map the distribution of near-surface (on the order of 100 m depth) permeability globally and over North America. The distribution of each hydrolithology is generally scale independent. The near-surface mean permeability is of the order of ∼5 × 10−14 m2. The results provide the first global picture of near-surface permeability and will be of particular value for evaluating global water resources and modeling the influence of climate-surface-subsurface interactions on global climate change.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations418
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207