MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975326357 · doi:10.1029/01eo00365

Multinational effort studies differences among arctic ocean models

2001· article· en· W1975326357 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEos · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersInternational Arctic Research Center, University of Alaska, FairbanksNational Science Foundation
KeywordsArcticClimatologyThe arcticEnvironmental scienceClimate changeClimate modelGeneral Circulation ModelGlobeThermohaline circulationOceanographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Arctic Ocean is an important component of the global climate system. The processes occurring in the Arctic Ocean affect the rate of deep and bottom water formation in the convective regions of the high North Atlantic and influence ocean circulation across the globe. This fact is highlighted by global climate modeling studies that consistently show the Arctic to be one of the most sensitive regions to climate change. But an identification of the differences among models and model systematic errors in the Arctic Ocean remains unchecked, despite being essential to interpreting the simulation results and their implications for climate variability. For this reason, the Arctic Ocean Model Intercomparison Project (AOMIP), an international effort, was recently established to carry out a thorough analysis of model differences and errors. The geographical focus of this effort is shown in Figure 1.

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.

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)0.000
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 score0.170
Threshold uncertainty score0.785

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.206 · 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