MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059170681 · doi:10.3137/ao.430103

Modelling the sea level of the upper Bay of Fundy

2005· article· en· W2059170681 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueATMOSPHERE-OCEAN · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsBathymetryBayTidal ModelStructural basinGeologySea levelWater levelOceanographyRemote sensingGeomorphologyGeographyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A high resolution model of the upper Bay of Fundy was developed to simulate the tides and sea level. The model includes the wetting and drying (inundation) of the extensive tidal flats in Minas Basin. The model reproduces the dominant M2 tidal harmonic with an error on the order of 0.30 m, and the total water level in Minas Basin with an r.m.s. error of 0.30–0.50 m. Overall the system is capable of a sea level simulation with a relative error of ∼10%. The motivation for the model development was the simulation of the land/water interface (instantaneous coastline) to aid in the validation of coastline retrieval algorithms from remotely sensed observations. Comparison of observed and simulated coastlines showed that a high quality representation of the local topography/bathymetry is as important as the sea level simulation in the calculation of the coastline. For example, long narrow features such as dykes are difficult to resolve in a dynamical model but are important for the inundation of low lying areas.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.408
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.183 · 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