MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054906636 · doi:10.1029/2005eo110005

Linking the scales of observation, process, and modeling of dust emissions

2005· article· en· W2054906636 on OpenAlex
Karen E. Kohfeld, Richard L. Reynolds, Jon D. Pelletier, Bill Nickling

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 · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersU.S. Geological Survey
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceAtmospheric sciencesEntrainment (biomusicology)Atmospheric dustClimate changeAtmospheric dynamicsAtmosphere (unit)Temporal scalesClimatologyMeteorologyAerosolGeographyOceanographyGeologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Each year, approximately four billion tons of dust are mobilized from dry landscapes and remain in the atmosphere from hours to weeks before being deposited. These large atmospheric dust loadings directly affect atmospheric dynamics and global climate [ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change , 2001], human health [ Plumlee and Ziegler , 2003], and soil fertility, and also influence ecosystem dynamics in ocean basins. Although some progress has been made in quantifying feedbacks (see Figure 1 on the Eos Electronic Supplement at http:www. agu. org/eos_elec/000931e.html) in the atmospheric dust cycle, the critical factors controlling the entrainment and transport of dust at differing spatial and temporal scales remain poorly quantified.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.722
Threshold uncertainty score0.143

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.208 · 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