MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2062316313 · doi:10.1029/2000jc000342

Importance of the Gulf of Aqaba for the formation of bottom water in the Red Sea

2002· article· en· W2062316313 on OpenAlexaff
Olaf Plähn, Burkard Baschek, Thomas H. Badewien, Maren Walter, Monika Rhein

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsNorth Pacific Marine Science Organization
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOceanographyWater massBottom waterGeologyAntarctic Bottom WaterCircumpolar deep waterWater columnWeddell Sea Bottom WaterSeawaterNorth Atlantic Deep WaterDeep ocean waterOutflowThermohaline circulationSea ice

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conductivity‐temperature‐depth tracer and direct current measurements collected in the northern Red Sea in February and March 1999 are used to study the formation of deep and bottom water in that region. Historical data showed that open ocean convection in the Red Sea can contribute to the renewal of intermediate or deep water but cannot ventilate the bottom water. The observations in 1999 showed no evidence for open ocean convection in the Red Sea during the winter 1998/1999. The overflow water from the Gulf of Aqaba was found to be the densest water mass in the northern Red Sea. An anomaly of the chlorofluorocarbon component CFC‐12 observed in the Gulf of Aqaba and at the bottom of the Red Sea suggests a strong contribution of this water mass to the renewal of bottom water in the Red Sea. The CFC data obtained during this cruise are the first available for this region. Because of the new signal, it is possible for the first time to subdivide the deep water column into deep and bottom water in the northern Red Sea. The available data set also shows that the outflow water from the Gulf of Suez is not dense enough to reach down to the bottom of the Red Sea but was found about 250 m above the bottom.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.158

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations60
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres→Same topicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research→French-language works237,207→