MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038392658 · doi:10.1029/2003jc002118

Use of ammonium and other nitrogen tracers to investigate the spreading of shelf waters in the western Arctic halocline

2005· article· en· W2038392658 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shigeto Nishino, Koji Shimada, Motoyo Itoh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHaloclineOceanographyAmmoniumRidgeGeologyWater columnEnvironmental scienceCanyonSalinityGeomorphologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The contribution of nutrient regeneration in summer to the nutrient maximum associated with Bering Sea Winter Water (BSWW) is estimated from the ammonium data, which was obtained in the outer shelf region of the Chukchi Sea for the first time by the R/V Mirai in 2002. The contribution rate reaches 20–30%, which is larger than the rate studied earlier inside the Chukchi shelf. Such BSWW influenced by the regeneration spreads to the Chukchi shelf slope up to the isobath of ∼3000 m, however, was not found in the Canada Basin. The ammonium and a nitrogen deficit are also useful tracers to study the spreading of shelf waters that are less saline than BSWW. In the Canada Basin, a small amount of ammonium (<2 μM) was observed east of the Northwind Ridge. This small amount of ammonium would be associated with the spreading of Eastern Chukchi Summer Water via the Barrow Canyon. Around the Chukchi Borderland, a prominent nitrogen deficit layer was found. It would be accompanied by Western Chukchi Summer Water via the Hope Valley–Herald Valley channel. The water flows into the Chukchi Abyssal Plain and then spreads eastward to the west of the Northwind Ridge with the decrease of nitrogen deficit signal.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.117

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations39
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207