MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964957914 · doi:10.1029/2008eo520007

Assessing the State of the Art of Ocean Internal Wave Research: Is There an Internal Wave Continuum in the Ocean? Seattle, Washington, 3–4 October 2008

2008· article· en· W1964957914 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew H. Alford, Jody Klymak

Bibliographic record

VenueEos · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsInternal waveGeologyInternal tideMeteorologyThermohaline circulationSubmarineGravitational waveSea statePhysical oceanographyGeophysicsClimatologyOceanographyEnvironmental sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Heavily studied in the 1970s and 1980s in part for their relevance to submarine detection and acoustic propagation, internal gravity waves are now of central interest in the physical oceanographic community for their role in global ocean energy cycles and mixing the oceans at great and shallow depths. Though the small time and space scales of internal waves may forever prevent their explicit resolution in global circulation models, their effects must be properly parameterized for reliable predictions of key quantities such as meridional heat transport.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.561

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEosSame topicOceanographic and Atmospheric ProcessesFrench-language works237,207