MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069536222 · doi:10.1029/2010jc006280

Poleward reach of the California Undercurrent extension

2010· article· en· W2069536222 on OpenAlexaffabout
Richard E. Thomson, Maxim V. Krassovski

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOceanographyDownwellingCurrent (fluid)UpwellingGeologyBoundary currentContinental shelfSpring (device)ClimatologyOcean current

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The California Undercurrent is known to transport relatively warm, high‐salinity, nutrient‐rich water from the equatorial Pacific to Vancouver Island along the western continental slope of North America. This transport helps maintain the high productivity of the eastern boundary California Current system. In this study, we use several decades of water property survey data for the coasts of Oregon, Washington, British Columbia, and Alaska to show that equatorial Pacific water carried poleward by the undercurrent can eventually reach the Aleutian Islands, roughly 11,000 km from the source region. Long‐term current meter records confirm the undercurrent as far north as Vancouver Island, where the current is found to be weakest in spring but then to strengthen through the summer and fall before merging with the wind‐forced, poleward flowing Davidson Current in winter. The core depth of the equatorial water increases from 150 m ± 25 m off northwest Washington (near the northern end of the western North America coastal upwelling domain) to 225 m ± 25 m off southeast Alaska (near the southern end of the Gulf of Alaska coastal downwelling domain).

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 score0.226
Threshold uncertainty score0.450

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations146
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicOceanographic and Atmospheric ProcessesFrench-language works237,207