MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1918270636 · doi:10.1002/2014gl059575

Reconstruction of Pacific Ocean bottom water salinity during the Last Glacial Maximum

2014· article· en· W1918270636 on OpenAlexaff
Tania Lado Insua, Arthur J. Spivack, Dennis Graham, Steven D’Hondt, Kathryn Moran

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsOcean Networks Canada SocietyUniversity of Victoria
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsLast Glacial MaximumOceanographySalinityGeologyLatitudeCircumpolar deep waterSeawaterWater massGlacial periodBottom waterClimatologyNorth Atlantic Deep WaterHoloceneThermohaline circulationGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Knowledge of salinity in the deep ocean is important for understanding past ocean circulation and climate. Based on sedimentary pore fluid chloride measurements of a single Pacific site, Adkins et al. ( ) suggested that, during the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM), the Pacific deep bottom water was saltier than expected based on lower sea level alone. Here we present high‐resolution salinity profiles from five sites in the South, Equatorial, and North Pacific Ocean. Our study greatly constrains understanding of LGM salinity in the Pacific Ocean. Our results show that LGM chloride concentrations of deep Pacific bottom water were 4.09 ± 0.4% greater than today's values. Pacific Ocean bottom water salinity was also indistinguishable from being homogeneous across the wide range of latitudes studied here. These LGM salinity reconstructions are on average slightly higher (~1.4 to 1% higher) than expected from sea level of the time, which is generally inferred to have been ~120 to ~135 m lower than today.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations34
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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