MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006094671 · doi:10.1029/2011eo220015

Research Spotlight: Aircraft measured oil evaporating from Gulf oil spill

2011· article· en· W2006094671 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ernie Tretkoff

Bibliographic record

VenueEos · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicOil Spill Detection and Mitigation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtmosphere (unit)Oil spillEnvironmental scienceCrude oilPetroleum engineeringGeologyMeteorologyEnvironmental engineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following the Gulf of Mexico oil spill in April 2010, some hydrocarbons dissolved in the ocean, while other leaked hydrocarbons that did not dissolve evaporated into the atmosphere. Ryerson et al. describe airborne in situ measurements of the hydrocarbons in the atmosphere after the oil spill, during initial cleanup operations. By comparing the amounts of chemicals in the atmosphere with those in crude oil, they determined which compounds dissolved in the ocean and which evaporated; by measuring the rate at which the compounds reached the atmosphere, they could estimate that oil and gas were leaking into the Gulf at a rate of at least 32,600–47,700 barrels of fluid per day.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.700
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0080.007

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.209 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEosSame topicOil Spill Detection and MitigationFrench-language works237,207