MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992624768 · doi:10.1021/es702361s

Evaluation of Two Current Approaches for the Measurement of Carbon Dioxide Diffusive Fluxes from Lentic Ecosystems

2008· article· en· W1992624768 on OpenAlexafffund
Nicolas Soumis, René Canuel, Marc Lucotte

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDaytimeEnvironmental scienceCarbon dioxideAtmospheric sciencesSampling (signal processing)Lake ecosystemCurrent (fluid)EcosystemHydrology (agriculture)Wind speedMeteorologyEcologyPhysicsGeologyThermodynamicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The dry ice sowing experiment (DISE) consisted in adding dry ice to a lake and monitoring the subsequent evasion of carbon dioxide (CO2). DISE allowed us to evaluate two approaches commonly used for measuring aquatic CO2 diffusive fluxes: the boundary layer equation (BLE) from Cole and Caraco (1998) and a particular model of static chamber (SC). CO2 evasion measurements with both approaches were compared to CO2 mass budgets as a relative reference to define their recovery coefficients (p). p for the BLE and the SC over the whole measurement period were 101 +/- 14% and 115 +/- 56%, respectively. Results from discrete sampling intervals revealed that the BLE generally provided estimations in good agreement (80-130%) with the mass budgets during both daytime and nighttime. Variations in p for the BLE were related to wind speed and, consequently, piston velocity (k600). The SC overestimated CO2 evasion during daytime (149 +/- 39%), and underestimated it during nighttime (57 +/- 18%). Variations in p for the SC were related to k600, stemming mainly from the alteration of the air/ water temperature gradient.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations31
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207